What the documents look like
This category centres on disposable plastic products reporting and environmental supervision. The main data sources are the Ministry of Commerce reporting system, POS plastic bag sales records, procurement systems and store ledgers. The documents handled day to day include plastic bag procurement ledgers, sales vouchers, semi-annual reports and self-discipline commitments.
The core action of contract and transaction material comparison is aligning quantities, periods and parties across the procurement ledger, sales vouchers and semi-annual report, item by item. The semi-annual report and the daily sales data differ in time granularity, so comparison requires an explicit period scope. A daily sales total cannot be treated as equivalent to the semi-annual reporting basis.
Constraints at the workflow routing step
Workflow routing connects material collection with branch decisions in this task. The form input node enters an interaction state when triggered, collects required information, and passes it to later nodes after submission. The user selection node evaluates the user's choice and executes the corresponding branch.
Collected material fields need to be passed explicitly to later retrieval, judgement or interface nodes, with output and input compared item by item. Order writing, document backfill and external status synchronisation require a separate business interface or later process. Retrieval and forms do not by themselves constitute authorisation to execute. The interaction state record is the behaviour of the interaction node; no separate global state switch is set.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: a store submits a Plastic Bag Procurement Ledger whose text reads "January to June 2025, purchased 12,000 plastic bags of 0.025 mm thickness, supplier Factory A". The same store's Sales Voucher Summary reads "January to June 2025, cashier system recorded 11,500 plastic bags sold". The draft sentence to be assessed is "The store's first-half plastic bag procurement quantity and sales quantity are consistent, and the reported data can be confirmed." In this comparison the party is the same store, the period is the same half-year, and the field is quantity. The values 12,000 and 11,500 are not equal, so the draft sentence is not supported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Category | Implementation check note |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Node behaviour | Enters interaction state when triggered; collects required material fields; passes them to later nodes after submission |
| User selection node | Node behaviour | Executes the "yes" branch after the user makes a choice; verify branch connections one by one |
| Material field output handover | Manual check | Pass collected ledger and voucher fields explicitly to later retrieval or judgement nodes; compare item by item |
| Period and party fields | Manual check | Before comparison, confirm the same store, the same half-year period and the same quantity field |
| External write division | Separate implementation required | Order writing, document backfill and external synchronisation are handled by a business interface or later process |
| Hypothetical exercise starting point | Manual check | Use the two quantities 12,000 and 11,500 as the paper comparison starting point for this exercise; check them word by word against the ledger and voucher source text |
Three common errors
- Treating form submission as verified material. The form input node collects and passes fields; business verification and authorised execution require later nodes or manual work. The submission action itself does not confirm that data is true.
- Comparing values from different periods or different fields directly. Ledger quantity and sales quantity can be assessed only under the same party, same period and same field. A difference produced by period misalignment does not constitute a contradiction.
- Treating the branch result of user selection as an executed external action. The user selection node executes the "yes" branch; order writing and external synchronisation still require a separate interface. The branch direction does not mean the business action has landed.
How to verify the setup
- Input the ledger source text and the sales voucher source text from the hypothetical sample above. Compare the same store, the same half-year and the same quantity field. The values 12,000 and 11,500 are not equal, so the draft sentence "procurement quantity and sales quantity are consistent" is not supported and is recorded as pending verification.
- Input a handover request that contains only a procurement ledger and lacks a sales voucher. Compare material completeness. When the sales voucher is missing, quantity consistency cannot be assessed; record the evidence gap and do not output a confirmation conclusion.
- Input a semi-annual report marked "pending review" together with a signed self-discipline commitment. Compare the signature states. Pending review does not mean approved; signing and report effectiveness are separate facts and are recorded as separate states.
The documented technical facts used to identify relevant content in this page are: the form input node enters an interaction state when triggered, collects required information, and passes it to later nodes after submission; the user selection node executes the corresponding "yes" branch after the user makes a choice, and branch connections are verified one by one; recording state is the behaviour of the interaction node, and no global state recording switch is set or claimed; collected information is passed explicitly to later retrieval, judgement or interface nodes, with output and input compared item by item; order writing, document backfill and external status synchronisation require a separate business interface or later process.
This page addresses only retail plastic bag and disposable products reporting, contract and transaction material comparison, and workflow routing. At operational handover, which materials, operations and requests sit in which authorisation state cannot be treated as authorised execution merely because retrieval or a form was used.