generated from coulomb/repo-seed
tegwick
2f25f99cae
T01 Toolchain — vite + pnpm 9.15 + React 18 + strict TS (ADR-0001).
T02 Folder layout — src/{shared,engine,anchor,source,binder,work,app}/
mirroring the future subsystem split, with path aliases.
T03 Boundary lint — eslint-plugin-boundaries enforcing the dependency
edges from wiki/DependencyMap.md §4; verified by a violating fixture.
T04 Canonical normalization v1 — src/shared/text/normalize.ts with
NORMALIZE_VERSION=1; 10/10 vitest covering ligatures, CRLF, soft
hyphens (including line-break reassembly), mixed whitespace.
T05 PDF fixture corpus — 7 user-supplied German PDFs in fixtures/pdfs/
(gitignored binaries) plus a manifest with verbatim known-good
quotes and page counts, ready for CE-WP-0002 selector tests.
T06 README upgrade — umbrella README points at wiki/docs/workplans
and documents the dev workflow.
T07 ADR-0002..0006 stubs in docs/decisions/.
Toolchain end-to-end: pnpm install + lint + typecheck + test all green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
48 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
48 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
# ADR-0004 — PDF viewer library for the reference workspace
|
|
|
|
- Status: proposed
|
|
- Date: 2026-05-24
|
|
- Workplan: CE-WP-0001-T07 (stub); validated in CE-WP-0002-T02
|
|
|
|
## Context
|
|
|
|
The PDF round-trip (select text → store selectors → reload → resolve →
|
|
scroll → highlight) is the riskiest architectural assumption in the MVP
|
|
(see `history/2026-05-24-initial-assessment.md`). The viewer library must:
|
|
|
|
- Render PDF.js-backed pages in a React shell.
|
|
- Expose stable APIs for programmatic text selection and highlight overlay.
|
|
- Not leak its types into `src/shared/` or `src/engine/` (enforced by the
|
|
T03 boundary lint rules).
|
|
- Survive across versions of PDF.js without trapping us in old versions.
|
|
|
|
CE-WP-0002-T02 is the spike that validates whichever library we pick. If
|
|
the spike fails the success criteria, this ADR is the place to record the
|
|
failure and propose an alternative.
|
|
|
|
## Options
|
|
|
|
- **A. `react-pdf-highlighter-plus`** *(current assumption)*
|
|
- Pros: React-native, opinionated overlay layer, well-tested fixture
|
|
coverage in the community.
|
|
- Cons: bundles a particular PDF.js version; risk of needing to fork to
|
|
get clean adapter boundaries.
|
|
|
|
- **B. `react-pdf` (the official PDF.js React binding) + custom overlay**
|
|
- Pros: thinnest abstraction; we own the overlay layer.
|
|
- Cons: significantly more code to write and maintain for selection/
|
|
highlight; reinventing PDF.js text-layer interaction.
|
|
|
|
- **C. PDF.js directly (no React wrapper)**
|
|
- Pros: maximum control.
|
|
- Cons: highest implementation cost; harder to integrate into the React
|
|
composition root.
|
|
|
|
## Decision
|
|
|
|
(blank — to be filled by the outcome of CE-WP-0002-T02.)
|
|
|
|
## Consequences
|
|
|
|
(blank)
|