Rust knowledge services, formal ontology checks, CUDA graph layout and desktop/XR clients.
Start · Architecture · Knowledge workflow · Codescape · Status · Docs
VisionClaw turns an identified Markdown-ontology corpus into a queryable, spatial application. It combines ontology reasoning and governed proposal workflows with GPU graph layout, interactive desktop/XR views and a stream of agent activity. People can inspect the knowledge and the proposed changes; a visualisation is not itself approval.
Use it for ontology exploration, reviewing corpus changes, following agent activity or immersive discussion of a complex domain. The corpus, agent runtime, community review surface and grounding server have separate owners and deployment requirements in the VisionFlow estate.
Recorded immersive graph walkthrough, September 2026
xr-immersive-agent-actions-upload-10mb.mp4
Local video: 109 seconds, no audio. It shows an earlier immersive graph session. It is historical media, not acceptance evidence for today's source, a particular headset model or every agent integration.
Use the host deployment path. The default feature set includes GPU and ontology support, so follow the deployment guide for CUDA, container-runtime and corpus requirements.
git clone https://github.com/DreamLab-AI/VisionClaw.git
cd VisionClaw
cp env.example .env
# Configure the deployment, corpus source, access policy and required secrets.
./scripts/launch.sh up devRun the launcher on the machine that owns the checkout and Docker bind paths. An agent container sharing a host Docker socket must use its authorised host-shell path; launching with container-local paths can mount stale or absent sources.
The current default is local corpus input; GitHub sync is optional and off (ADR-2115). Read the corpus contract and current deployment configuration to select the source and its required credentials. Private authoring data is not supplied by cloning this application.
| Surface | Development address | Prerequisite |
|---|---|---|
| Desktop client | http://localhost:3001 |
Application ready and corpus configured |
| API and WebSockets | http://localhost:4000/api |
Backend ready and relevant access policy |
| Codescape through dev proxy | http://localhost:3001/codescape/ |
Opt-in Codescape service |
After a pull or merge, ./scripts/launch.sh redeploy dev republishes build inputs and rebuilds/restarts the backend in place. Use rebuild dev for the launcher’s image/dependency workflow. Read the runbook before changing a running stack; this README refresh did not launch or redeploy it.
flowchart TB
NOTES["Authored Markdown corpus"] --> OM["Shared Ontomark producer"]
OM --> BUNDLE["Identified public and machine projections"]
BUNDLE --> INGEST["Configured corpus source and admission"]
INGEST --> STORE["Oxigraph knowledge/ontology store"]
STORE --> REASON["Whelk classification and validation paths"]
STORE --> GPU["CUDA graph layout"]
GPU --> WEB["Desktop browser client"]
GPU --> XR["Godot OpenXR client"]
AGENTS["Configured agent activity producers"] --> EVENTS["Authenticated agent-event ingest"]
EVENTS --> WEB
EVENTS --> XR
PROPOSE["Vault proposal and consequence delta"] --> REVIEW["Review and governance workflow"]
REVIEW --> WRITE["Owning corpus mutation or pull request"]
WRITE --> NOTES
SQL["SQLite: settings, proposals and operational state"] --- REVIEW
Oxigraph is the canonical triple store; SQLite holds non-triple state by domain. Neo4j is retired. The backend workspace separates contracts, domain types, ontology/protocol/GPU functionality, adapters and actors; extraction is not complete, so the baseline remains the guide to effective ownership.
Desktop and Godot XR are different clients consuming shared wire contracts. Compatibility of position records reduces duplicated protocol work; it does not establish identical interaction or device acceptance. GPU/wire ABI, protocol registry and XR architecture define their boundaries.
- Configure a corpus source and load the intended generation/projection. Markdown/frontmatter defines the authored ontology; runtime stores are derived application state.
- Query or explore the graph. GPU position and graph topology help inspection; layout does not prove a relationship or an assertion is correct.
- Prepare a change through the supported proposal path. Integrity checks, reasoning and authorisation have different purposes and produce different outcomes.
- Review the proposed bytes and consequences. The configured broker/forum path carries a signed decision; a permission decision is not a receipt that the mutation was applied.
- Apply through the owning workflow and observe its receipt or pull-request lifecycle. Merge observation requires the relevant credentials and polling configuration; creating a PR does not mean its contents are already in canon.
The current elevation queue is a specific ontology workflow, not a universal agent-control system. Insight migration, authority chain and data authority/erasure explain how identity, policy and lifecycle constrain it.
Certificates and proposal consequences
vault certify records derivations under the supported RDFS rule table and compares the named subclass closure with Whelk's result. An independent oo-cert checker can recheck the certificate. The certificate warrants derivation under that rule table, not factual truth or arbitrary OWL 2 EL entailment.
vault propose can attach a consequence delta: named consequences added or lost, examples and a count of blank-node-bearing consequences not compared. A conservative result over the named closure must not be read as proof that every semantic effect was compared.
The 20 October follow-up replaces a private certificate engine with the shared rdfs-certificate crate. The source adapter, proposal implementation and ADR-2147 specify the boundary and dated checker evidence. The client includes consequence display; workflow configuration invokes certification on its applicable build path. Neither fact proves that every served generation has been rechecked or that every deployment runs the new code.
Agent activity, provenance and governance events
Agent activity enters through /wss/agent-events and can be rendered as beams or other transient cues. The position protocol uses the frozen 52-byte V3 record in V5 envelopes; agent actions use the separate 0x23 opcode. See the binary protocol and agent-beam driver.
The Agent Control Surface uses kinds 31400–31405. Response admission depends on the forum's role/delegation policy and the consumer's checks, not a blanket assertion that only one UI or key can ever sign. The application must preserve the effective policy tier and record whether an approved action happened.
Provenance records and their query endpoints make attribution inspectable on implemented paths. Fail-open emission, incomplete receipts and external stores have their own limits; do not infer “every write is durably proven” from a successful mutation response. Read security profiles and the authority documents.
Codescape visualises source code and collaboration rather than the knowledge corpus. This repository mounts it as the codescape/ submodule and supplies the host compose/proxy contract. Codescape has its own Cargo workspace, lockfile, data directory, client and acceptance evidence.
Its tested build boundary excludes knowledge stores; its shared estate dependency is the published visionclaw-wire record, while CUDA PTX arrives as a runtime artefact. The standalone Codescape checkout may be newer than this repository's pinned submodule; compare revisions when evaluating a feature.
# From this VisionClaw checkout, on the deployment host:
git submodule update --init codescape
CODESCAPE=1 ./scripts/launch.sh up devThe direct client port is loopback-only in the recorded deployment; hook ingest stays on the private container network. Codescape's main-port authentication remains open in its current implementation and --require-auth refuses startup. The development proxy is not production authentication. Microphone capture needs a secure browser context. Read the extraction decision and Codescape's own README before enabling it.
Source reviewed 21 October 2026 at e2d4e2cc1. Recent commits add the consequence display/certification workflow and shared certificate crate. Source presence, tests at a revision, running services and device acceptance are separate evidence classes.
The work register, known issues and governing documents contain the detailed outstanding work. Old class/kernel counts, September defect totals and whole-estate memory totals are not current application acceptance evidence.
VisionFlow owns the ecosystem map and compatibility records. Ontomark owns shared compilation; knowledgeGraph distributes the public corpus; Loom serves grounding. Agentbox runs agents; the forum kit supplies communication/review contracts; solid-pod-rs supplies tier-specific pod primitives. Shared identifiers do not make these one runtime or one licence scope.
Docs hub · System overview · Vault contract · API · Deployment · Decision ledger
Read CONTRIBUTING and the relevant governing document before changing authority, storage or the frozen wire. Root application code is AGPL-3.0-only (LICENSE); extracted crates and submodules have their own terms. The in-tree MPL proposal is not the operative root licence. MAINTAINERS.md records maintainers and upstream credit, including Melvin Carvalho's Solid/JSS lineage.