# Notebook Implementation Plan This note turns the Notebook operating model into a concrete Didactopus implementation sequence. It assumes the conclusions in [notebook-operating-model.md](./notebook-operating-model.md): - the Notebook is the durable knowledge layer - learner products should derive from it - distinctions, qualifications, constraints, and source roles are first-class - public rendering must stay source-grounded and paraphrastic by default ## Goal Make Didactopus operate as a system with: 1. source-grounded ingestion and review 2. a durable Notebook concept network 3. learner, workbench, and public products derived from that network The key implementation mistake to avoid is treating the Notebook as a static page generator. It should instead be the stable intermediate representation that other Didactopus products depend on. ## Phase 1. Strengthen the source-grounded substrate Primary concern: - preserve the information needed to build a useful Notebook later Required additions at this layer: - source role classification: - overview - mechanism - nuance - controversy - argumentation - distinction candidates: - `A vs B` - `A does not imply B` - `B can occur without A` - learner-significance cues: - why this distinction matters - what misconception it prevents - what explanatory work it does - first-class secondary products: - definitions - qualifications - constraints - quote candidates Expected implementation targets: - `GroundRecall` review/export payloads - `CiteGeist` bibliography support and claim-support outputs - source-adapter metadata from `doclift` and related import flows Completion indicators: - concept review payloads expose source roles - distinction-like claims are tagged explicitly - secondary products are inspectable without custom post-processing ## Phase 2. Build Notebook-native concept structure Primary concern: - organize knowledge around explanatory hubs rather than narrow labels Required additions: - explicit hub-concept representation - first-ring and second-ring neighborhood representation - support for concept aliases without collapsing meaningful distinctions - preferred-source selection by source role - Notebook-level summaries built from grounded claims plus secondary products Expected Didactopus targets: - `notebook_page` payload shape - hub/neighborhood builder logic - pack emission for Notebook-facing artifacts Completion indicators: - a Notebook page can identify: - the primary hub - first-ring neighbors - key distinctions - preferred overview/mechanism/nuance sources - bibliography topics no longer have to serve as the primary Notebook center ## Phase 3. Make distinctions learner-facing Primary concern: - learning works better when concepts are contrasted, qualified, and scoped Required derived-product features: - distinction panels in learner workbench views - definitions, constraints, and qualifications surfaced beside explanations - “why this matters” cues for important conceptual differences - quote/source-trail views for argumentation workflows Expected Didactopus targets: - learner workbench UI and backend payloads - mentor/practice/evaluator session grounding - lesson and activity generation Completion indicators: - learner-facing explanations can say not only what something is, but also: - what it is not - what it does not imply - what nearby concepts it is often confused with - practice prompts can target misconceptions and contrastive understanding ## Phase 4. Separate rendering contracts Primary concern: - the same Notebook knowledge should support different output modes without blurring their rules Three rendering contracts should be explicit: ### Notebook contract - preserve concept structure - preserve source trails - preserve review context - preserve distinctions and caveats ### Workbench contract - surface definitions, constraints, qualifications, and quote candidates - prefer inspectability over polish - retain enough detail for argumentation and source checking ### Public exposition contract - prefer paraphrase over copied wording - mark all quotations explicitly - attach source citation in display - never present unmarked source wording as original Didactopus prose Expected Didactopus targets: - notebook-page rendering - workbench payloads and views - public publication/export paths Completion indicators: - public pages can be audited for quote marking and citation display - workbench pages expose more raw source-oriented structure than public pages ## Phase 5. Source-role-aware retrieval and ranking Primary concern: - different tasks need different kinds of support Retrieval should be able to prefer: - overview sources for first-pass orientation - mechanism sources for explanatory detail - nuance sources for qualifications and constraints - controversy sources for dispute framing - argumentation sources for rebuttal and debate workflows This should influence: - Notebook page support lists - learner-session grounding - workbench recommendation ordering - quote-candidate selection Completion indicators: - the same concept can yield different ranked source sets for `learn`, `review`, `argue`, and `publish` contexts ## Phase 6. Pack and publication alignment Primary concern: - the Notebook must become a stable export surface for other Didactopus flows Needed outputs: - Notebook-aware pack format additions - workbench-friendly secondary-product exports - publication-safe Notebook/public page export rules Expected Didactopus targets: - pack emission - backend API payloads - public export and frontend consumption Completion indicators: - packs can carry hub concepts, neighborhood structure, secondary products, and source-role metadata - public and workbench consumers can rely on one shared substrate while rendering differently ## Near-term priority sequence The next practical Didactopus sequence should be: 1. make distinctions first-class in review/export payloads 2. add source-role metadata to Notebook-facing outputs 3. upgrade `notebook_page` to summarize hub, neighborhood, and secondary lanes 4. expose secondary-product and distinction views in learner/workbench flows 5. enforce explicit public citation and quote-marking contracts ## What the pilot changed Before the pilot, it was reasonable to think of the Notebook as a side product assembled from reviewed concepts. After the pilot, the stronger view is: - the Notebook should be the stable center of Didactopus knowledge organization - learner products are better when built from Notebook structure - short web captures and longer textbook sources should play different roles - definitions, qualifications, constraints, and quotes are not optional extras That change should guide both schema evolution and product decisions.