What the documents look like
Presale group-buy work collects orders first and organizes procurement and fulfillment afterward. The operating materials for a session include the presale product table, the aggregated order result, the procurement plan, and the cut-off notice. These documents are produced and consulted daily and per session. The handover problem is narrower than the workflow itself: at the moment one operator passes a session to the next, which materials, actions, and requests sit under which authorization state. A retrieval result, a filled-in form, or a pending request is not an authorization to act.
Two features of this category shape the access question. First, the aggregated order result and the procurement plan must agree on quantities before procurement and sorting waves are arranged, so the people who can read or change those documents matter. Second, the cut-off notice marks a boundary: after the cut-off, the group leader side no longer accepts added orders, while procurement planning continues. A handover request that arrives after the cut-off is a different action from one that arrives before it, and the two need separate checks.
Constraints at the access controls step
In the documented permission system, member permissions have the highest priority, and department and group permissions are combined as a union with lower priority than member permissions. Resource types include team, app, dataset, and collection. File-level permission for a knowledge base is a commercial-edition feature. In the closed state, the readability of a collection matches the knowledge base and the system does not query any collection permission records. In the open state, each file or folder generates a complete permission snapshot, and lists, details, and retrieval recall are authorized item by item against that snapshot. Knowledge base permission remains a threshold; collection permission cannot bypass it.
Retrieval recall filters by the files readable by the current member only when authorization is performed under the current member identity. A workflow that preselects a knowledge base and does not authorize under member identity does not perform file-level filtering and still recalls under knowledge base permission. Team administrators do not bypass file-level permission. A relevance score is not a category, entity, or permission filter, and retrieval is not authorization.
The following is a hypothetical drill sample, not a record of any real session, customer, or approval.
Material text one (presale product table, hypothetical): Session S-0417, cut-off 17 April 20:00, product is three leafy greens, planned aggregated quantity follows the same session in the previous period. Material text two (cut-off notice draft, hypothetical): after this session's cut-off, the procurement planning role places the purchase, and the group leader side no longer accepts added orders. Request to be judged (hypothetical): operations assistant A asks to view the aggregated order result at 17 April 20:30 with "usable" permission and to export it for handover to the next day's shift.
The sample does not provide A's member permission value or group membership, and it does not state whether the knowledge base holding the aggregated order result has file-level permission enabled. Those fields are unknown and must be confirmed before handover.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Item | Documented setting or implementation check | Relation to this sample |
|---|---|---|
| Member permission | Highest priority, granted directly to the individual | Check A's individual permission value |
| Department and group permission | Union, lower priority than member permission | Check the union result for A's department and groups |
| Resource type | team, app, dataset, collection | Confirm which type holds the aggregated order result |
| File-level permission switch | Closed state inherits knowledge base permission; open state authorizes item by item against the snapshot | Decide whether viewing and export need item-by-item authorization |
| Retrieval recall filtering | Applies only when authorizing under current member identity | Decide whether export passes through that entry |
| Permission requirement | Knowledge base "manageable" is the entry for enabling; configuring collaborators requires that file's administrator | Decide who may configure permission and restore inheritance |
Three common errors
- Treating "usable" as permission to export. In the documented table, "usable" means dialogue interaction is allowed, and export is a separate action. The input is the action A requested and the permission already granted; the comparison is whether the two are the same action; the observable result is whether the permission item covers export.
- Using retrieval relevance in place of access authorization. The input is the retrieval setting and A's identity; the comparison is whether authorization runs under member identity; the observable result is whether a file outside A's readable set appears in the recall. Relevance is not a permission filter.
- Treating a pending review request as approved. The input is the status of A's request; the comparison is whether an approval record exists; the observable result is whether the request and the approval are the same fact. A pending request is not approval.
How to verify the setup
- Verification one: input material text one and the request to be judged; compare A's individual permission value and the documented meaning of "usable"; observe whether "usable" covers export. If it does not cover export, the export request is not supported by that permission.
- Verification two: input material text two; compare the cut-off time with the request time; observe whether 20:30 falls after the cut-off. An added-order request after cut-off and an export request are different actions and need separate checks. The cut-off notice does not by itself grant or deny export.
- Verification three: use a paper input of an empty result to check the downstream design; observe whether the export flow still decides by permission when nothing is recalled. Do not claim that a hypothetical rule returns an empty result. All three verifications must run within a target retrieval scope the checker is authorized to access; where that access is missing, record the gap rather than filling it.
These checks do not establish that any test, deployment, approval, or handover actually occurred.