ejr/weatherfeeder
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Mark NWS forecast discussion resilience implemented

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Eric Rakestraw
2026-08-02 23:02:43 +00:00
parent 0b5eaf46f4
commit a62cb87b78
1 changed files with 13 additions and 37 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

50
docs/roadmap/afd-section-heading-variants.md
View File

@@ -2,13 +2,12 @@
## Status
The original ellipsis-first and slash-qualified heading feature is implemented.
The resilience follow-up defined below is proposed and unimplemented.
Implemented.
## Completed Baseline
## Implemented Behavior
The NWS Area Forecast Discussion parser now recognizes these heading families
for key messages, short term, long term, and aviation:
The NWS Area Forecast Discussion parser recognizes these heading families for
all structurally valid section identities:
```text
.<SECTION>...<optional qualifier>
@@ -18,42 +17,19 @@ for key messages, short term, long term, and aviation:
Discovery, qualifier extraction, and recognized-section boundary detection use
one provider-specific parser. Slash delimiters are removed from qualifiers,
legacy qualifier text is preserved, and aviation remains a boundary rather than
a canonical field. Focused provider and normalizer regressions cover the
implemented forms.
a canonical field.
## Remaining Problem
Current NWS bulletins vary beyond those two same-line forms. In particular:
- an ellipsis-first heading may put its qualifier on the next nonblank line;
- NWS presentation output can place `-- Changed Discussion --` markers and an
`Updated at` line around section content;
- valid AFDs can include `DISCUSSION`, `UPDATE`, `MARINE`, `HYDROLOGY`,
`CLIMATE`, `FIRE WEATHER`, office watch/advisory blocks, and other topic
headings; and
- minor punctuation or qualifier changes can produce headings that are
structurally valid but absent from the parser's identity whitelist.
The current parser recognizes only four exact identities. Unknown headings do
not terminate the preceding section. It also expects a text section's optional
qualifier and `Issued at` line in a narrow order. Consequently, valid upstream
format variants can leave qualifier and section-time fields empty, leak
presentation metadata into prose or key messages, or allow one section to
absorb another.
## Feature Objective
Make AFD parsing resilient to minor upstream format evolution by separating:
The parser separates:
1. generic structural heading recognition;
2. section boundary scanning;
3. canonical section-role selection; and
4. section-preamble and presentation cleanup.
The parser should accept new structurally valid topic names as safe boundaries
without treating them as new canonical fields.
Structurally valid topic names act as safe boundaries without becoming new
canonical fields.
## Targeted End State
## Implemented Details
### Generic heading recognition
@@ -135,9 +111,9 @@ A single `DISCUSSION` section and other currently unmapped identities are
recognized as boundaries but are not forced into short- or long-term fields.
Exposing such content would require a separate canonical schema decision.
## Acceptance Criteria
## Verified Coverage
The resilience follow-up is complete when automated tests demonstrate that:
Automated tests demonstrate that:
- every previously accepted heading and canonical result remains compatible;
- generic structurally valid identities terminate preceding content without
@@ -167,5 +143,5 @@ This follow-up does not:
- change schemas, persistence contracts, configuration, or downstream APIs; or
- fetch live NWS data during tests.
Canonical support for additional AFD section identities should be driven by a
separate consumer requirement and schema roadmap.
Additional canonical support for AFD section identities requires a separate
consumer requirement and schema roadmap.