Annotations

Status: Current Last updated: 2026-10-02 (commit 2d7e886b)

A scoped annotation is a bracketed code written immediately after the thing it describes: hello [*], <the dog> [//], bobo [= toy], 0 [= ! whining]. It is scoped because it attaches to a specific construct rather than to the utterance as a whole, which is what separates it from a postcode (utterance-wide, written before the terminator) and from a dependent tier (a whole line of its own).

This chapter answers three questions the model makes precise: what can carry annotations, what it means for something to carry none, and why an annotated construct always carries at least one.

What can be annotated

Each of these constructs has exactly two spellings. The list is the count; stating a number beside it is one more thing to keep true, and this line said five above six rows.

Everything else in an utterance is a leaf that takes no scoped annotation: pauses, separators, overlap points, bullets, freecodes, and the long-feature, underline and nonvocal delimiters.

Two constructs are worth calling out because they behave unlike their neighbours. A replaced word (word [: replacement]) is ReplacedWord rather than an Annotated<Word>, because the replacement is part of the word’s identity rather than a comment on it; it carries its own annotations alongside. And a retrace’s annotations describe the retrace itself, not the material inside it, which is why a retrace opens no language scope for the words it contains.

Carrying none is a different variant, not an empty list

The bare and annotated spellings are different variants because they are different things. hello is a word; hello [*] is a word plus a claim about it. The model does not represent the first as the second with nothing in it.

This is enforced in the type rather than checked afterwards:

// The only public constructor. `None` when the list is empty.
AnnotatedContentAnnotations::new(annotations) -> Option<AnnotatedContentAnnotations>

So an annotated wrapper cannot be built without an annotation, and that Option IS the bare-versus-annotated decision. Every place the parser builds content, it reads:

match AnnotatedContentAnnotations::new(scoped) {
    None => UtteranceContent::Event(event),
    Some(scoped) => UtteranceContent::AnnotatedEvent(Annotated::new(event, scoped)),
}

TryFrom<Vec<_>> applies the same check, Deserialize rejects an empty list off the wire rather than accepting one, and there is deliberately no Default. The type also does not take the crate’s collection-newtype macro, whose take and retain can empty a collection in place.

Why this is stated so emphatically

An invariant stated only in prose does not hold, so it is enforced by the types. UtteranceContent has a bare Action beside its bare Event, and BracketedItem has a bare Group; an action or group with no annotations therefore has somewhere to go, and nothing is wrapped in an Annotated or AnnotatedGroup carrying an empty list. The two content enums are symmetric, and the empty state is unconstructible. The rule is not something a validator looks for; it is something the compiler refuses.

No error code catches the empty case, because none can: bare [*] is valid CHAT, and an empty bracket is a parse error. The reasoning is recorded in Leniency Policy, Decision 1.

What an annotation attaches to when constructs nest

Scoping follows the innermost construct. In <the big dog> [//] [* m] both annotations attach to the group. In <the [//] dog> the marker attaches to the word inside it, because that is what precedes it.

One consequence matters for anything reading language: a <...> [@s:spa] group opens a code-switch scope for the words inside it, and a retrace does not open one at all. Tools should ask the model for the governing scope rather than re-deriving it from the annotation list, because the two rules differ and the difference is invisible if you get it wrong.

This page last changed: 2026-10-02 (commit 2d7e886b). The whole book last changed: 2026-10-07 (commit 5e895791).