NUIF architecture thesis
NUIF defines authored-interface semantics in draft specification modules and tests selected projections through a reference implementation. The model, adapter profiles and implementation choices have separate acceptance criteria.
Core thesis
The architectural hypothesis is that explicit authored properties, typed relationships and context-scoped evaluated results permit source edits with declared fidelity. Flattening is treated as a lowering with a loss report when it removes information required by subsequent edits.
The recommended architecture is a layered hybrid:
Document containment tree
│ stable IDs
├── component / instance graph
├── token / theme graph
├── layout constraint graph
├── interaction / state graph
├── provenance / correspondence graph
└── asset dependency graph
Authored model ──evaluate/lower──► resolved model ──► render scene
▲ │
└──────── reconcile / lift ◄────┘
Prior-art foundations
- MLIR: dialects, explicit lowering, partial legality and multiple abstraction levels.
- OpenUSD: non-destructive composition, references, layers and variants.
- glTF: small core, extension registry, used/required capabilities.
- DTCG: token interchange.
- SVG/Unicode/OpenType: geometry and text foundations.
- Retentive/symmetric lenses: synchronization with preserved source regions.
The prior-art comparison and cross-industry synthesis identify the source records and adaptation decisions.
Integration work
The unresolved integration work concerns correspondence between authored properties, resolved observations and source syntax. The adapter inventory distinguishes implemented scalar synchronization from unsupported structural changes.
Canonical layers
| Layer | Proposed responsibility |
|---|---|
| Document | Identity, containment, semantics and accessibility |
| Component | Definitions, instances, slots, parameters, variants and overrides |
| Layout | Authored sizing and constraints |
| Visual | Geometry, paint, text and effects |
| Behavior | Interactions, state transitions, animation and data bindings |
| Resolved | Computed layout, shaped text and paint for an evaluation context |
| Provenance | Correspondence and fidelity diagnostics |
| Resource | Semantic assets, byte resources, locators and derivation records |
This decomposition includes proposed semantics beyond the implemented profiles. Research coverage records their evidence status.
No lower layer is permitted to silently erase a higher-level authored construct. Lowerings that cannot represent a construct must emit fidelity records.
Stable identity
Identity is semantic and independent of path, order and display name. Moving an entity does not change its ID. Content hashes identify immutable resources and canonical snapshots, not editable semantic entities.
Compiler and reconstruction ports
Deterministic source adapters and probabilistic screenshot reconstruction meet at the operation boundary:
retained source + resolved host observations ─┐
├─> typed operations -> core
pixels + OCR/CV/model hypotheses ─────────────┘ -> render/evaluate
Source-backed and screenshot-only inputs retain distinct evidence classes. A model/provider is replaceable and cannot redefine the operation grammar, validator, layout semantics, resource identity or fidelity ceilings.
Falsifiability
The v0 HTML experiment tests retention of component identity, token bindings, layout intent and an opaque extension through an editor/source round trip. Its named fixture passes. The broader hypothesis remains subject to counterexamples from other documents and edits.
The resource/reconstruction extension fails if independent package writers cannot reproduce the proposed bytes, if browser capture cannot be pinned without secret leakage, if visual objectives reward flat screenshot copies, or if adaptation fails to beat the untuned tool-assisted baseline on a frozen holdout.