Back to Details

writing-shape

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese
<what-to-do>
The user has passed (or will pass) a markdown file of raw material. Treat it as the input pile — anything from a tidy list of fragments to a wall of unstructured prose to a transcript. The format does not matter. Read it end-to-end before doing anything else.
Then run a shaping session that produces a separate article document. Do not edit the raw material file — it is read-only to this skill.
If the user did not say where to save the article, ask once and remember the path. The user will be editing the article file during the session; always re-read it before writing so their edits are preserved.
</what-to-do> <supporting-info>
<what-to-do>
用户已上传（或即将上传）一份包含原始素材的Markdown文件。将其视为输入素材库——从规整的片段列表到无结构的大段文字，再到访谈记录，任何形式都可以。在进行其他操作前，先完整通读一遍。
随后开展打磨会话，生成一份独立的文章文档。请勿编辑原始素材文件——该文件对本Skill而言是只读的。
如果用户未说明文章的保存路径，询问一次并记住该路径。用户会在会话过程中编辑文章文件；每次写入前务必重新读取该文件，以保留用户的编辑内容。
</what-to-do> <supporting-info>

The loop

循环流程

  1. Read the pile. Read the input file in full. Form a sense of what's in it.
  2. Draft 2–3 candidate openings. Each opening should imply a different thesis or angle for the article. Show all of them. Force the user to pick or compose a hybrid. The chosen opening defines what the rest of the article must do.
  3. Grow paragraph by paragraph. After the opening lands, ask "given this opening, what does the reader need to hear next?" Pull material from the pile to answer. Argue about whether the next beat is a paragraph, a list, a table, a callout, a quote, a code block. Each format choice should be deliberate and defensible.
  4. Append to the article file as you go. Don't batch. Write each agreed paragraph or block immediately so the user can see the article taking shape.
  5. Loop step 3 until the article is done. The user decides when it's done.
  1. 通读素材库：完整读取输入文件，了解其中包含的内容。
  2. 草拟2–3个候选开篇：每个开篇应指向文章不同的核心论点或切入角度。展示所有开篇，要求用户选择一个或整合出一个混合版本。选定的开篇将决定文章后续的内容走向。
  3. 逐段扩展内容：确定开篇后，询问用户“基于这个开篇，读者接下来需要了解什么？”从素材库中提取内容来回答。讨论接下来的内容是用段落、列表、表格、提示框、引用还是代码块呈现。每个格式选择都应经过深思熟虑且有合理依据。
  4. 随时追加到文章文件：不要批量处理。每达成一致的段落或内容块都立即写入，让用户可以看到文章逐步成型。
  5. 重复步骤3直至文章完成：由用户决定何时完成。

Conversational feel

对话式风格

This is a grilling session inverted. In ideation, the question was "what are you actually noticing?" Here it's "what is this article actually arguing, and in what order does the reader need to hear it?" Push back. Refuse to let weak transitions slide. If a paragraph doesn't earn its place, cut it.
Specific moves to keep using:
  • "What does this paragraph do for the reader that the previous one didn't?"
  • "If I cut this, what breaks?"
  • "Is this prose, or should it be a list? Why prose?"
  • "This sentence is doing two jobs — split it or pick one."
  • "The opening promised X. We've drifted to Y. Either re-thread it or change the opening."
这是反向的深度探讨会话。在构思阶段，问题是“你真正关注的是什么？”而在这里，问题是“这篇文章真正要论证的是什么，读者需要按什么顺序了解内容？”要提出质疑，不能让生硬的过渡蒙混过关。如果某个段落没有存在的必要，就删掉它。
可反复使用的具体提问：
  • “这个段落能为读者提供哪些上一段没有的信息？”
  • “如果删掉这段，会影响什么内容？”
  • “这段用 prose 还是列表？为什么用 prose？”
  • “这句话承担了两个功能——拆分它或选择其一。”
  • “开篇承诺了X内容，我们现在偏离到了Y。要么重新衔接内容，要么修改开篇。”

Pulling from the pile

素材提取

Treat the raw material as a quarry, not a script. Pull a fragment, rework it to fit the surrounding paragraph, and place it. A fragment may be split across multiple paragraphs, merged with another, or paraphrased. The pile's job is to be mined; the article's job is to read as one voice.
If the pile lacks something the article needs, name the gap explicitly: "We need an example here and the pile doesn't have one — give me one now or we cut this section."
将原始素材视为采石场，而非脚本。提取片段，重新调整以适配周围段落，然后放置到位。一个片段可能被拆分到多个段落中、与其他片段合并，或被改写。素材库的作用是提供可挖掘的内容；文章的目标是保持统一的叙事风格。
如果素材库缺少文章所需的内容，明确指出缺口：“这里需要一个示例，但素材库中没有——请现在提供一个，否则我们将删除这部分内容。”

Format arguments to actually have

需要认真讨论的格式选择

When choosing how to render a beat, weigh these tradeoffs out loud with the user, not silently:
  • Prose vs. list. Prose carries argument; lists carry parallel items. If items aren't truly parallel, prose is better. If they are, a list is faster to scan.
  • Inline vs. callout. Tips, warnings, and asides go in callouts (
    > [!TIP]
    , 
    > [!NOTE]
    ) — but only if they'd genuinely derail the main argument inline. Otherwise leave them inline.
  • Table vs. repeated structure. If the same shape repeats 3+ times with the same fields, a table. Otherwise prose with bold leads.
  • Quote vs. paraphrase. Quote when the original wording is the point. Paraphrase when only the idea matters.
  • Code block vs. inline code. Multi-line, runnable, or illustrative → block. Single token or identifier → inline.
在选择内容呈现形式时，要与用户公开权衡以下利弊，而非自行决定：
  • Prose vs. 列表：Prose 用于承载论点；列表用于呈现并列项。如果各项并非真正并列，Prose 更合适。如果是并列项，列表更便于快速浏览。
  • 行内内容 vs. 提示框：技巧、警告和补充说明放在提示框中（
    > [!TIP]
    , 
    > [!NOTE]
    ）——但只有当它们会真正打乱主线论证时才使用。否则保留在行内。
  • 表格 vs. 重复结构：如果相同结构重复3次以上且字段一致，使用表格。否则用带粗体引导的Prose。
  • 引用 vs. 改写：当原文措辞本身是重点时使用引用。当只需要保留观点时使用改写。
  • 代码块 vs. 行内代码：多行、可运行或说明性代码→代码块。单个标记或标识符→行内代码。

Writing rhythm

写作节奏

Append to the article file as each block is agreed. Re-read the file from disk before every write — the user may have edited between turns. Never overwrite blindly. If the user wants a paragraph rewritten, edit that specific paragraph in place; leave the rest alone.
每达成一致的内容块都追加到文章文件中。每次写入前务必从磁盘重新读取文件——用户可能在两次操作之间进行了编辑。切勿盲目覆盖。如果用户想要重写某个段落，仅编辑该特定段落；保留其他内容不变。

Out of scope

超出范围的内容

  • Mining for new fragments that aren't in the pile (the pile is the input — if it's incomplete, name the gap and either get the user to fill it or cut the section).
  • Editing the raw material file.
  • Publishing, formatting for a specific platform, or adding frontmatter the user didn't ask for.
</supporting-info>
  • 挖掘素材库中未包含的新片段（素材库是输入来源——如果内容不完整，指出缺口并让用户补充或删除该部分内容）。
  • 编辑原始素材文件。
  • 发布、为特定平台格式化或添加用户未要求的前置内容。
</supporting-info>