@oxyhq/crowdsource-contracts 0.1.0

package/dist/reviews.d.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,276 @@
+/**
+ * What one reviewer submits (§9.2, §9.3) and how they step away (§4.1).
+ *
+ * §9.2 splits the form in two — describe the material, then evaluate it against
+ * a rule — to reduce anchoring on the reporter's category and to let the same
+ * description be reused under different policies. §9.3 then gives one flat
+ * result object. Both are true at once: a `ReviewFinding` carries the step-one
+ * fields (`code`, `resourceIds`, `severity`, `confidence`) and the step-two
+ * fields (`policyRuleIds`), and the enclosing submission carries the step-two
+ * verdict (`outcome`, `recommendedActions`). The split is a property of the
+ * interface, not of the payload, so it is documented here rather than nested.
+ *
+ * The submission is `.strict()`, and that is a safety decision, not tidiness.
+ * A review belongs to an assignment the server issued; the assignment id comes
+ * from the route, the case and the reviewer come from the assignment. If this
+ * object tolerated a `caseId`, an `assignmentId` or a `reviewerId`, the day
+ * somebody read one of them would be the day a reviewer could vote on a case
+ * they were never drawn for — against "nobody chooses the case they review".
+ * Strict makes that field impossible rather than merely unused.
+ */
+import { z } from 'zod';
+/**
+ * What a single reviewer can conclude.
+ *
+ * Narrower than §9.6's decision outcomes on purpose. `inconclusive` is what the
+ * consensus engine reports when a panel does not agree — a single reviewer
+ * cannot fail to agree with themselves, and "the absence of consensus is
+ * neither guilt nor innocence" only holds if `inconclusive` is produced by the
+ * engine and never voted for. `duplicate`, `escalated` and `superseded` are
+ * likewise case-level states, not opinions about material. The plan never
+ * enumerates review outcomes; this is that gap resolved toward the invariant.
+ */
+export declare const REVIEW_OUTCOMES: readonly ["violation", "no_violation", "insufficient_context", "content_unavailable"];
+export declare const ReviewOutcomeSchema: z.ZodEnum<{
+    violation: "violation";
+    no_violation: "no_violation";
+    insufficient_context: "insufficient_context";
+    content_unavailable: "content_unavailable";
+}>;
+export type ReviewOutcome = z.infer<typeof ReviewOutcomeSchema>;
+/** §9.5 feeds this into `contextFactor`: 1.0 if sufficient, 0.5 otherwise. */
+export declare const CONTEXT_SUFFICIENCIES: readonly ["sufficient", "insufficient"];
+export declare const ContextSufficiencySchema: z.ZodEnum<{
+    sufficient: "sufficient";
+    insufficient: "insufficient";
+}>;
+export type ContextSufficiency = z.infer<typeof ContextSufficiencySchema>;
+/**
+ * One structured finding from one reviewer (§9.3).
+ *
+ * `resourceIds` is required and non-empty: §9.4 makes the affected resource one
+ * of the dimensions consensus is measured on, so a finding that does not say
+ * what it is about cannot be agreed with or disagreed with.
+ *
+ * `policyRuleIds` is optional: step one of the form can complete without step
+ * two — a reviewer may classify material accurately and find no rule that
+ * covers it, which is exactly the `no_violation`-with-findings case §6.2
+ * describes.
+ *
+ * `context` is §9.2's and §9.4's "excepción", written as §6.2 writes it: beside
+ * the code and the severity, because "artistic nudity" is a different
+ * description of the material from "nudity" rather than a different verdict
+ * about it. Optional, and absence means no exception applies.
+ *
+ * `confidence` communicates quality and triggers escalation (§9.5). It never
+ * weights the vote.
+ */
+export declare const ReviewFindingSchema: z.ZodObject<{
+    code: z.ZodEnum<{
+        "integrity.spam": "integrity.spam";
+        "integrity.scam": "integrity.scam";
+        "integrity.fraud": "integrity.fraud";
+        "integrity.impersonation": "integrity.impersonation";
+        "integrity.coordinated_manipulation": "integrity.coordinated_manipulation";
+        "harassment.insult": "harassment.insult";
+        "harassment.targeted_abuse": "harassment.targeted_abuse";
+        "harassment.sexual_harassment": "harassment.sexual_harassment";
+        "harassment.doxxing": "harassment.doxxing";
+        "harassment.credible_threat": "harassment.credible_threat";
+        "hate.dehumanization": "hate.dehumanization";
+        "hate.slur": "hate.slur";
+        "hate.incitement": "hate.incitement";
+        "hate.protected_targeting": "hate.protected_targeting";
+        "violence.graphic": "violence.graphic";
+        "violence.threat": "violence.threat";
+        "violence.instruction": "violence.instruction";
+        "violence.celebration": "violence.celebration";
+        "sexual_content.nudity": "sexual_content.nudity";
+        "sexual_content.explicit_activity": "sexual_content.explicit_activity";
+        "sexual_content.non_consensual": "sexual_content.non_consensual";
+        "sexual_content.exploitation": "sexual_content.exploitation";
+        "child_safety.sexualization": "child_safety.sexualization";
+        "child_safety.grooming": "child_safety.grooming";
+        "child_safety.exploitation": "child_safety.exploitation";
+        "self_harm.promotion": "self_harm.promotion";
+        "self_harm.instruction": "self_harm.instruction";
+        "self_harm.imminent_risk": "self_harm.imminent_risk";
+        "privacy.personal_information": "privacy.personal_information";
+        "privacy.intimate_media": "privacy.intimate_media";
+        "privacy.location_exposure": "privacy.location_exposure";
+        "commerce.prohibited_item": "commerce.prohibited_item";
+        "commerce.counterfeit": "commerce.counterfeit";
+        "commerce.misleading_listing": "commerce.misleading_listing";
+        "commerce.unsafe_product": "commerce.unsafe_product";
+        "platform_abuse.ban_evasion": "platform_abuse.ban_evasion";
+        "platform_abuse.report_abuse": "platform_abuse.report_abuse";
+        "platform_abuse.automation_abuse": "platform_abuse.automation_abuse";
+        "other.policy_specific": "other.policy_specific";
+        "other.unclassifiable": "other.unclassifiable";
+    }>;
+    resourceIds: z.ZodArray<z.ZodString>;
+    severity: z.ZodEnum<{
+        low: "low";
+        medium: "medium";
+        high: "high";
+        critical: "critical";
+    }>;
+    context: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodEnum<{
+        artistic: "artistic";
+        educational: "educational";
+        documentary: "documentary";
+        newsworthy: "newsworthy";
+        satire: "satire";
+        counter_speech: "counter_speech";
+        medical: "medical";
+        consensual: "consensual";
+        fictional: "fictional";
+    }>>;
+    confidence: z.ZodNumber;
+    policyRuleIds: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodArray<z.ZodString>>;
+}, z.core.$strict>;
+export type ReviewFinding = z.infer<typeof ReviewFindingSchema>;
+/**
+ * The body of `POST /v1/reviewer/assignments/{id}/reviews` — §9.3's "result of
+ * a review".
+ *
+ * `recommendedActions` is a list of action tokens here, where a decision's
+ * `recommendedActions` are objects that name their target resources. That
+ * difference is in the plan (§9.3 versus Appendix B) and is kept: a reviewer
+ * recommends a course of action, and the consensus process is what binds an
+ * agreed recommendation to the specific resources it applies to.
+ */
+export declare const ReviewSubmissionSchema: z.ZodObject<{
+    outcome: z.ZodEnum<{
+        violation: "violation";
+        no_violation: "no_violation";
+        insufficient_context: "insufficient_context";
+        content_unavailable: "content_unavailable";
+    }>;
+    contextSufficiency: z.ZodEnum<{
+        sufficient: "sufficient";
+        insufficient: "insufficient";
+    }>;
+    findings: z.ZodArray<z.ZodObject<{
+        code: z.ZodEnum<{
+            "integrity.spam": "integrity.spam";
+            "integrity.scam": "integrity.scam";
+            "integrity.fraud": "integrity.fraud";
+            "integrity.impersonation": "integrity.impersonation";
+            "integrity.coordinated_manipulation": "integrity.coordinated_manipulation";
+            "harassment.insult": "harassment.insult";
+            "harassment.targeted_abuse": "harassment.targeted_abuse";
+            "harassment.sexual_harassment": "harassment.sexual_harassment";
+            "harassment.doxxing": "harassment.doxxing";
+            "harassment.credible_threat": "harassment.credible_threat";
+            "hate.dehumanization": "hate.dehumanization";
+            "hate.slur": "hate.slur";
+            "hate.incitement": "hate.incitement";
+            "hate.protected_targeting": "hate.protected_targeting";
+            "violence.graphic": "violence.graphic";
+            "violence.threat": "violence.threat";
+            "violence.instruction": "violence.instruction";
+            "violence.celebration": "violence.celebration";
+            "sexual_content.nudity": "sexual_content.nudity";
+            "sexual_content.explicit_activity": "sexual_content.explicit_activity";
+            "sexual_content.non_consensual": "sexual_content.non_consensual";
+            "sexual_content.exploitation": "sexual_content.exploitation";
+            "child_safety.sexualization": "child_safety.sexualization";
+            "child_safety.grooming": "child_safety.grooming";
+            "child_safety.exploitation": "child_safety.exploitation";
+            "self_harm.promotion": "self_harm.promotion";
+            "self_harm.instruction": "self_harm.instruction";
+            "self_harm.imminent_risk": "self_harm.imminent_risk";
+            "privacy.personal_information": "privacy.personal_information";
+            "privacy.intimate_media": "privacy.intimate_media";
+            "privacy.location_exposure": "privacy.location_exposure";
+            "commerce.prohibited_item": "commerce.prohibited_item";
+            "commerce.counterfeit": "commerce.counterfeit";
+            "commerce.misleading_listing": "commerce.misleading_listing";
+            "commerce.unsafe_product": "commerce.unsafe_product";
+            "platform_abuse.ban_evasion": "platform_abuse.ban_evasion";
+            "platform_abuse.report_abuse": "platform_abuse.report_abuse";
+            "platform_abuse.automation_abuse": "platform_abuse.automation_abuse";
+            "other.policy_specific": "other.policy_specific";
+            "other.unclassifiable": "other.unclassifiable";
+        }>;
+        resourceIds: z.ZodArray<z.ZodString>;
+        severity: z.ZodEnum<{
+            low: "low";
+            medium: "medium";
+            high: "high";
+            critical: "critical";
+        }>;
+        context: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodEnum<{
+            artistic: "artistic";
+            educational: "educational";
+            documentary: "documentary";
+            newsworthy: "newsworthy";
+            satire: "satire";
+            counter_speech: "counter_speech";
+            medical: "medical";
+            consensual: "consensual";
+            fictional: "fictional";
+        }>>;
+        confidence: z.ZodNumber;
+        policyRuleIds: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodArray<z.ZodString>>;
+    }, z.core.$strict>>;
+    recommendedActions: z.ZodArray<z.ZodEnum<{
+        remove_or_restrict: "remove_or_restrict";
+        allow_with_label: "allow_with_label";
+        remove: "remove";
+        hide: "hide";
+        label: "label";
+        age_gate: "age_gate";
+        reduce_distribution: "reduce_distribution";
+        freeze_transaction: "freeze_transaction";
+        suspend_user: "suspend_user";
+        request_changes: "request_changes";
+        allow: "allow";
+        restore: "restore";
+        no_action: "no_action";
+        request_more_context: "request_more_context";
+        hold: "hold";
+        local_manual_review: "local_manual_review";
+        keep_restricted_temporarily: "keep_restricted_temporarily";
+        escalate: "escalate";
+        no_global_effect: "no_global_effect";
+        specialist_queue: "specialist_queue";
+        legal_queue: "legal_queue";
+        safety_queue: "safety_queue";
+    }>>;
+    notes: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodString>;
+}, z.core.$strict>;
+export type ReviewSubmission = z.infer<typeof ReviewSubmissionSchema>;
+/**
+ * §4.1: a reviewer may declare a conflict, a language they do not have,
+ * material too sensitive for them, or context they cannot obtain — "without
+ * penalty". These four are the plan's own list, made structured as §10.3 asks.
+ */
+export declare const RECUSAL_REASONS: readonly ["conflict_of_interest", "language", "too_sensitive", "insufficient_context"];
+export declare const RecusalReasonSchema: z.ZodEnum<{
+    language: "language";
+    insufficient_context: "insufficient_context";
+    conflict_of_interest: "conflict_of_interest";
+    too_sensitive: "too_sensitive";
+}>;
+export type RecusalReason = z.infer<typeof RecusalReasonSchema>;
+/**
+ * The body of `POST /v1/reviewer/assignments/{id}/recuse`.
+ *
+ * Strict for the same reason as the submission, and with no free-text field
+ * beyond a short optional note: a recusal is routing information, and the more
+ * it can say about the case, the more it becomes a channel for case content to
+ * leak into operational data.
+ */
+export declare const RecusalSubmissionSchema: z.ZodObject<{
+    reason: z.ZodEnum<{
+        language: "language";
+        insufficient_context: "insufficient_context";
+        conflict_of_interest: "conflict_of_interest";
+        too_sensitive: "too_sensitive";
+    }>;
+    note: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodString>;
+}, z.core.$strict>;
+export type RecusalSubmission = z.infer<typeof RecusalSubmissionSchema>;
+//# sourceMappingURL=reviews.d.ts.map

package/dist/reviews.d.ts.map

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"version":3,"file":"reviews.d.ts","sourceRoot":"","sources":["../src/reviews.ts"],"names":[],"mappings":"AAAA;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;GAmBG;AAEH,OAAO,EAAE,CAAC,EAAE,MAAM,KAAK,CAAC;AAYxB;;;;;;;;;;GAUG;AACH,eAAO,MAAM,eAAe,uFAKlB,CAAC;AACX,eAAO,MAAM,mBAAmB;;;;;EAA0B,CAAC;AAC3D,MAAM,MAAM,aAAa,GAAG,CAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,OAAO,mBAAmB,CAAC,CAAC;AAEhE,8EAA8E;AAC9E,eAAO,MAAM,qBAAqB,yCAA0C,CAAC;AAC7E,eAAO,MAAM,wBAAwB;;;EAAgC,CAAC;AACtE,MAAM,MAAM,kBAAkB,GAAG,CAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,OAAO,wBAAwB,CAAC,CAAC;AAE1E;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;GAmBG;AACH,eAAO,MAAM,mBAAmB;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;kBAO9B,CAAC;AACH,MAAM,MAAM,aAAa,GAAG,CAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,OAAO,mBAAmB,CAAC,CAAC;AAEhE;;;;;;;;;GASG;AACH,eAAO,MAAM,sBAAsB;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;kBA+B/B,CAAC;AACL,MAAM,MAAM,gBAAgB,GAAG,CAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,OAAO,sBAAsB,CAAC,CAAC;AAEtE;;;;GAIG;AACH,eAAO,MAAM,eAAe,wFAKlB,CAAC;AACX,eAAO,MAAM,mBAAmB;;;;;EAA0B,CAAC;AAC3D,MAAM,MAAM,aAAa,GAAG,CAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,OAAO,mBAAmB,CAAC,CAAC;AAEhE;;;;;;;GAOG;AACH,eAAO,MAAM,uBAAuB;;;;;;;;kBAGlC,CAAC;AACH,MAAM,MAAM,iBAAiB,GAAG,CAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,OAAO,uBAAuB,CAAC,CAAC"}

package/dist/reviews.js

@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+"use strict";
+/**
+ * What one reviewer submits (§9.2, §9.3) and how they step away (§4.1).
+ *
+ * §9.2 splits the form in two — describe the material, then evaluate it against
+ * a rule — to reduce anchoring on the reporter's category and to let the same
+ * description be reused under different policies. §9.3 then gives one flat
+ * result object. Both are true at once: a `ReviewFinding` carries the step-one
+ * fields (`code`, `resourceIds`, `severity`, `confidence`) and the step-two
+ * fields (`policyRuleIds`), and the enclosing submission carries the step-two
+ * verdict (`outcome`, `recommendedActions`). The split is a property of the
+ * interface, not of the payload, so it is documented here rather than nested.
+ *
+ * The submission is `.strict()`, and that is a safety decision, not tidiness.
+ * A review belongs to an assignment the server issued; the assignment id comes
+ * from the route, the case and the reviewer come from the assignment. If this
+ * object tolerated a `caseId`, an `assignmentId` or a `reviewerId`, the day
+ * somebody read one of them would be the day a reviewer could vote on a case
+ * they were never drawn for — against "nobody chooses the case they review".
+ * Strict makes that field impossible rather than merely unused.
+ */
+Object.defineProperty(exports, "__esModule", { value: true });
+exports.RecusalSubmissionSchema = exports.RecusalReasonSchema = exports.RECUSAL_REASONS = exports.ReviewSubmissionSchema = exports.ReviewFindingSchema = exports.ContextSufficiencySchema = exports.CONTEXT_SUFFICIENCIES = exports.ReviewOutcomeSchema = exports.REVIEW_OUTCOMES = void 0;
+const zod_1 = require("zod");
+const primitives_1 = require("./primitives");
+const policies_1 = require("./policies");
+const resources_1 = require("./resources");
+const taxonomy_1 = require("./taxonomy");
+/**
+ * What a single reviewer can conclude.
+ *
+ * Narrower than §9.6's decision outcomes on purpose. `inconclusive` is what the
+ * consensus engine reports when a panel does not agree — a single reviewer
+ * cannot fail to agree with themselves, and "the absence of consensus is
+ * neither guilt nor innocence" only holds if `inconclusive` is produced by the
+ * engine and never voted for. `duplicate`, `escalated` and `superseded` are
+ * likewise case-level states, not opinions about material. The plan never
+ * enumerates review outcomes; this is that gap resolved toward the invariant.
+ */
+exports.REVIEW_OUTCOMES = [
+    'violation',
+    'no_violation',
+    'insufficient_context',
+    'content_unavailable',
+];
+exports.ReviewOutcomeSchema = zod_1.z.enum(exports.REVIEW_OUTCOMES);
+/** §9.5 feeds this into `contextFactor`: 1.0 if sufficient, 0.5 otherwise. */
+exports.CONTEXT_SUFFICIENCIES = ['sufficient', 'insufficient'];
+exports.ContextSufficiencySchema = zod_1.z.enum(exports.CONTEXT_SUFFICIENCIES);
+/**
+ * One structured finding from one reviewer (§9.3).
+ *
+ * `resourceIds` is required and non-empty: §9.4 makes the affected resource one
+ * of the dimensions consensus is measured on, so a finding that does not say
+ * what it is about cannot be agreed with or disagreed with.
+ *
+ * `policyRuleIds` is optional: step one of the form can complete without step
+ * two — a reviewer may classify material accurately and find no rule that
+ * covers it, which is exactly the `no_violation`-with-findings case §6.2
+ * describes.
+ *
+ * `context` is §9.2's and §9.4's "excepción", written as §6.2 writes it: beside
+ * the code and the severity, because "artistic nudity" is a different
+ * description of the material from "nudity" rather than a different verdict
+ * about it. Optional, and absence means no exception applies.
+ *
+ * `confidence` communicates quality and triggers escalation (§9.5). It never
+ * weights the vote.
+ */
+exports.ReviewFindingSchema = zod_1.z.strictObject({
+    code: taxonomy_1.TaxonomyCodeSchema,
+    resourceIds: zod_1.z.array(resources_1.ResourceIdSchema).min(1).max(primitives_1.CONTRACT_LIMITS.RESOURCE_REFS_PER_FINDING_MAX),
+    severity: taxonomy_1.SeveritySchema,
+    context: taxonomy_1.FindingContextSchema.optional(),
+    confidence: primitives_1.UnitIntervalSchema,
+    policyRuleIds: zod_1.z.array(policies_1.PolicyRuleIdSchema).max(primitives_1.CONTRACT_LIMITS.POLICY_RULE_IDS_MAX).optional(),
+});
+/**
+ * The body of `POST /v1/reviewer/assignments/{id}/reviews` — §9.3's "result of
+ * a review".
+ *
+ * `recommendedActions` is a list of action tokens here, where a decision's
+ * `recommendedActions` are objects that name their target resources. That
+ * difference is in the plan (§9.3 versus Appendix B) and is kept: a reviewer
+ * recommends a course of action, and the consensus process is what binds an
+ * agreed recommendation to the specific resources it applies to.
+ */
+exports.ReviewSubmissionSchema = zod_1.z
+    .strictObject({
+    outcome: exports.ReviewOutcomeSchema,
+    contextSufficiency: exports.ContextSufficiencySchema,
+    findings: zod_1.z.array(exports.ReviewFindingSchema).max(primitives_1.CONTRACT_LIMITS.FINDINGS_MAX),
+    recommendedActions: zod_1.z
+        .array(taxonomy_1.RecommendedActionSchema)
+        .max(primitives_1.CONTRACT_LIMITS.RECOMMENDED_ACTIONS_MAX),
+    /**
+     * §13.5 and the "sensitive content never reaches logs" invariant apply to
+     * this field as much as to the evidence: a note is free text a human wrote
+     * while looking at the material, so it is bounded here and must be treated
+     * as case content everywhere downstream — never logged, never attested.
+     */
+    notes: zod_1.z.string().max(primitives_1.CONTRACT_LIMITS.LONG_TEXT_MAX_LENGTH).optional(),
+})
+    .superRefine((review, ctx) => {
+    if (review.outcome === 'insufficient_context' && review.contextSufficiency !== 'insufficient') {
+        ctx.addIssue({
+            code: 'custom',
+            path: ['contextSufficiency'],
+            message: 'an outcome of insufficient_context requires contextSufficiency "insufficient"',
+        });
+    }
+    if (review.outcome === 'violation' && review.findings.length === 0) {
+        ctx.addIssue({
+            code: 'custom',
+            path: ['findings'],
+            message: 'a violation outcome requires at least one finding',
+        });
+    }
+});
+/**
+ * §4.1: a reviewer may declare a conflict, a language they do not have,
+ * material too sensitive for them, or context they cannot obtain — "without
+ * penalty". These four are the plan's own list, made structured as §10.3 asks.
+ */
+exports.RECUSAL_REASONS = [
+    'conflict_of_interest',
+    'language',
+    'too_sensitive',
+    'insufficient_context',
+];
+exports.RecusalReasonSchema = zod_1.z.enum(exports.RECUSAL_REASONS);
+/**
+ * The body of `POST /v1/reviewer/assignments/{id}/recuse`.
+ *
+ * Strict for the same reason as the submission, and with no free-text field
+ * beyond a short optional note: a recusal is routing information, and the more
+ * it can say about the case, the more it becomes a channel for case content to
+ * leak into operational data.
+ */
+exports.RecusalSubmissionSchema = zod_1.z.strictObject({
+    reason: exports.RecusalReasonSchema,
+    note: zod_1.z.string().max(primitives_1.CONTRACT_LIMITS.SHORT_TEXT_MAX_LENGTH).optional(),
+});
+//# sourceMappingURL=reviews.js.map

package/dist/reviews.js.map

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"version":3,"file":"reviews.js","sourceRoot":"","sources":["../src/reviews.ts"],"names":[],"mappings":";AAAA;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;GAmBG;;;AAEH,6BAAwB;AAExB,6CAAmE;AACnE,yCAAgD;AAChD,2CAA+C;AAC/C,yCAKoB;AAEpB;;;;;;;;;;GAUG;AACU,QAAA,eAAe,GAAG;IAC7B,WAAW;IACX,cAAc;IACd,sBAAsB;IACtB,qBAAqB;CACb,CAAC;AACE,QAAA,mBAAmB,GAAG,OAAC,CAAC,IAAI,CAAC,uBAAe,CAAC,CAAC;AAG3D,8EAA8E;AACjE,QAAA,qBAAqB,GAAG,CAAC,YAAY,EAAE,cAAc,CAAU,CAAC;AAChE,QAAA,wBAAwB,GAAG,OAAC,CAAC,IAAI,CAAC,6BAAqB,CAAC,CAAC;AAGtE;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;GAmBG;AACU,QAAA,mBAAmB,GAAG,OAAC,CAAC,YAAY,CAAC;IAChD,IAAI,EAAE,6BAAkB;IACxB,WAAW,EAAE,OAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,4BAAgB,CAAC,CAAC,GAAG,CAAC,CAAC,CAAC,CAAC,GAAG,CAAC,4BAAe,CAAC,6BAA6B,CAAC;IAChG,QAAQ,EAAE,yBAAc;IACxB,OAAO,EAAE,+BAAoB,CAAC,QAAQ,EAAE;IACxC,UAAU,EAAE,+BAAkB;IAC9B,aAAa,EAAE,OAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,6BAAkB,CAAC,CAAC,GAAG,CAAC,4BAAe,CAAC,mBAAmB,CAAC,CAAC,QAAQ,EAAE;CAC/F,CAAC,CAAC;AAGH;;;;;;;;;GASG;AACU,QAAA,sBAAsB,GAAG,OAAC;KACpC,YAAY,CAAC;IACZ,OAAO,EAAE,2BAAmB;IAC5B,kBAAkB,EAAE,gCAAwB;IAC5C,QAAQ,EAAE,OAAC,CAAC,KAAK,CAAC,2BAAmB,CAAC,CAAC,GAAG,CAAC,4BAAe,CAAC,YAAY,CAAC;IACxE,kBAAkB,EAAE,OAAC;SAClB,KAAK,CAAC,kCAAuB,CAAC;SAC9B,GAAG,CAAC,4BAAe,CAAC,uBAAuB,CAAC;IAC/C;;;;;OAKG;IACH,KAAK,EAAE,OAAC,CAAC,MAAM,EAAE,CAAC,GAAG,CAAC,4BAAe,CAAC,oBAAoB,CAAC,CAAC,QAAQ,EAAE;CACvE,CAAC;KACD,WAAW,CAAC,CAAC,MAAM,EAAE,GAAG,EAAE,EAAE;IAC3B,IAAI,MAAM,CAAC,OAAO,KAAK,sBAAsB,IAAI,MAAM,CAAC,kBAAkB,KAAK,cAAc,EAAE,CAAC;QAC9F,GAAG,CAAC,QAAQ,CAAC;YACX,IAAI,EAAE,QAAQ;YACd,IAAI,EAAE,CAAC,oBAAoB,CAAC;YAC5B,OAAO,EAAE,+EAA+E;SACzF,CAAC,CAAC;IACL,CAAC;IACD,IAAI,MAAM,CAAC,OAAO,KAAK,WAAW,IAAI,MAAM,CAAC,QAAQ,CAAC,MAAM,KAAK,CAAC,EAAE,CAAC;QACnE,GAAG,CAAC,QAAQ,CAAC;YACX,IAAI,EAAE,QAAQ;YACd,IAAI,EAAE,CAAC,UAAU,CAAC;YAClB,OAAO,EAAE,mDAAmD;SAC7D,CAAC,CAAC;IACL,CAAC;AACH,CAAC,CAAC,CAAC;AAGL;;;;GAIG;AACU,QAAA,eAAe,GAAG;IAC7B,sBAAsB;IACtB,UAAU;IACV,eAAe;IACf,sBAAsB;CACd,CAAC;AACE,QAAA,mBAAmB,GAAG,OAAC,CAAC,IAAI,CAAC,uBAAe,CAAC,CAAC;AAG3D;;;;;;;GAOG;AACU,QAAA,uBAAuB,GAAG,OAAC,CAAC,YAAY,CAAC;IACpD,MAAM,EAAE,2BAAmB;IAC3B,IAAI,EAAE,OAAC,CAAC,MAAM,EAAE,CAAC,GAAG,CAAC,4BAAe,CAAC,qBAAqB,CAAC,CAAC,QAAQ,EAAE;CACvE,CAAC,CAAC"}