What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of student disciplinary and appeal handling. The material sources are three types of original documents: disciplinary fact materials, disciplinary decision letters, and appeal statements, which are added one by one as the disciplinary process advances. Disciplinary fact materials record behavior descriptions and evidence; disciplinary decision letters carry the conclusion and effective date; appeal statements reflect objections and demands. After these three types of materials enter this feature, each participates in the file-level permission system as an independent file: disciplinary fact materials and disciplinary decision letters are usually maintained by handling members, while appeal statements are maintained by appeal intake members. Field characteristics center on name, quantity, date, and signature items. Discrepancy localization means performing an item-by-item comparison of these fields for the same object between two materials.
Configuration and implementation checks
Enable commercial file permissions and give the member read access to the knowledge base.
This step is executed by member permissions and file-level permissions (server-side authentication), and outputs the set of visible files filtered by member. The "discrepancy list" is completed subsequently by AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work; the file list and retrieval only return the readable set filtered by member. The visible set determines which materials a member can compare, while the field-level conclusions of the discrepancy list are still finalized by the review step.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Disciplinary fact materials | Whether name, quantity, date, and signature are item-by-item consistent with the disciplinary decision letter | Take the same object, check the name, quantity, date, and signature items of the two materials, and mark the discrepant fields |
| Disciplinary decision letter | Whether name, quantity, date, and signature are item-by-item consistent with the appeal statement | Take the same object, check the name, quantity, date, and signature items of the two materials, and mark the discrepant fields |
| Appeal statement | Whether the receipt and signature are complete, and whether the version is synchronized with the disciplinary decision letter | Check the receipt and signature items, compare the version identifier, and record unsynchronized items |
| Visible file set | Filter item by item by member; unreadable files do not occupy a place | Use a restricted member account to view the list and details, and check the visible scope and pagination results |
Three common errors
- Symptom: a restricted member saw files they should not see. Cause: file-level permissions were not filtered item by item by member, and the list was not returned according to the readable set.
- Symptom: retrieval recalled files beyond authorization. Cause: retrieval was not filtered by the current member's readable files, or the node did not authenticate by member identity.
- Symptom: collaborators cannot delete files. Cause: deletion is limited to the creator; collaborators and write-permission members are both filtered out and prompted.
How to verify the setup
Use a restricted account to view the list and perform one retrieval, and check the visible scope; then check whether teamId, tmbId, and member permissions take effect according to file-level filtering.
Business test: use one real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, and check the name, quantity, date, and signature items.
- Use a restricted member account to view the file list and details, and confirm that unreadable files do not occupy a place and that pagination results are correct.
- Check the authentication configuration of the workflow and knowledge base search nodes, and confirm that retrieval is filtered by the current member's readable files.