What this category's data looks like
Materials for university laboratory safety grading and classification come from three types: laboratory grading and classification tables, hazard source lists, and safety responsibility statements. The grading and classification table records the laboratory name, room number, hazard level, and responsibility tier; the hazard source list registers chemical names, gas cylinders, equipment names, quantities, and storage locations; the safety responsibility statement states the responsible person, date, and signed receipt. Materials are updated centrally each academic year, and supplementary entries are made when new equipment is added or personnel adjustments occur; the version is based on the latest signed page. When entering workflow orchestration, the grading and classification table determines the visible tier, the hazard source list limits the fields disclosed externally, and the safety responsibility statement confirms the validity of the authorization signature. The fields, dates, and signatures of the three must be aligned item by item. If names, quantities, or dates are inconsistent, or if versions are not synchronized, or if a signed receipt is missing, the authorization scope and external entry point must not be opened.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branching), outputting branch direction and interaction status records. "Externally available entry points and authorization scope" are then completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution according to the branch. When a node is triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state and records the workflow status; after the user completes the selection, execution continues along the branch corresponding to the selected option.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Laboratory grading and classification table | The check column must verify whether the laboratory name, hazard level, responsibility tier, and signature date are consistent with the hazard source list and safety responsibility statement | In the node, check the options and branch connections one by one, confirm that different levels correspond to different visible scopes, and reference variables to run a trial once |
| Hazard source list | The check column must verify whether chemical names, gas cylinders, equipment names, quantities, and storage locations match the grading and classification table and the responsibility statement | In subsequent nodes, reference variables and run a trial to see whether quantities and names are visible as configured when accessed by a restricted identity |
| Safety responsibility statement | The check column must verify whether the responsible person, date, signature, and receipt are complete, and whether the version is synchronized with the grading and classification table | Trigger a user selection once and check the node status and branch direction corresponding to nodeId in the run record |
| User selection node | The check column must verify whether each option corresponds to one branch, whether the interaction state is recorded, and whether the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes | In the node, check the options and branch connections one by one, trigger once, and check the node status in the run record |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the name and quantity of the same laboratory do not match between the grading and classification table and the hazard source list. Cause: the two materials are entered separately without field alignment, and only one is changed during updates.
- Symptom: the safety responsibility statement lacks a signature or receipt, but the authorization scope is still opened. Cause: the signed page was not collected in sync, and the version was not synchronized, causing an old version to be referenced.
- Symptom: after selecting an option, the default branch is still followed, and the process stops after the interaction is completed. Cause: the options and branch connections were not checked one by one, and the selection result variable was not passed to subsequent nodes.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: run trials for each option one by one, check the branch direction and interaction status in the run record, confirm that the node status corresponding to nodeId is recorded, and that the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes.
Business test: access once with a restricted identity, check whether the visible scope matches the configuration, and confirm that unauthorized content is not visible.
- In the node, check the options and branch connections one by one, trigger a user selection once, and check the node status and branch direction in the run record.
- In subsequent nodes, reference
variablesand run a trial once to confirm that the selection result variable has been passed in, then check whether the external entry point and authorization scope are generated according to the branch.