# 為 PRD 建立產品研究知識庫

這是三份研究筆記的虛構練習：從衝突請求中選出一個有限的 PRD 決定，再標出需要更多研究的部分。

## 任務

只根據三份研究筆記，選出最小且有依據的 PRD 決定，保留衝突與未知資訊，並指出哪些選擇需要更多產品負責人的判斷。每個結論都用 [[filename]] 引用。

## 預期推理

提出有來源連結的草稿，並在分享前要求人工審查。不要只憑這組小型且互相衝突的資料承諾自動發佈、匯出、儲存預設、團隊權限或完整路線圖。

## 完整來源資料包

### Research note A — source-linked review — research-note-a.md

```markdown
# Research note A — source-linked review

Fictional moderated session note; no real participant or customer is represented.

The evaluator wanted an imported Markdown note to produce a draft answer with a link back to each source passage. They preferred to review the draft before it became a shared page. The note records one narrow workflow preference, not demand for automatic publishing, team permissions, or a mobile app.
```

### Research note B — local-only request — research-note-b.md

```markdown
# Research note B — local-only request

Fictional research note; no real participant or customer is represented.

The evaluator asked to keep source files and drafts in a local workspace and rejected an external export for this exercise. They said an explicit review step matters more than a polished final page. The note does not establish that every user wants local-only storage or that export is never useful.
```

### Research note C — conflicting product request — research-note-c.md

```markdown
# Research note C — conflicting product request

Fictional product-research note; no real participant or customer is represented.

A separate request asked for a CSV export of the source-linked draft and also asked for automatic publishing after import. The request conflicts with note B's local-only preference and note A's review-before-sharing preference. The sample is too small to resolve the conflict or justify a broad roadmap.
```

## Reference answer: choose a reviewable draft, keep the roadmap narrow

The three fictional notes support one limited PRD decision: imported Markdown may produce a source-linked draft that a person reviews before sharing. Export, automatic publishing, storage defaults, and broader permissions remain unresolved because the notes conflict and the sample is small.

# Product-research reference for a PRD

## Limited decision

Add one narrow requirement: an imported Markdown note can produce a draft answer with links to its source passages, and a person must review the draft before it becomes a shared page. This is supported by the source-linked review preference and the request for an explicit review step. [[research-note-a.md]] [[research-note-b.md]]

## Keep unresolved

Do not commit automatic publishing. Note A prefers review before sharing, note B prioritizes local-only drafts, and note C separately requests automatic publishing and CSV export. The notes conflict and are too small to decide a universal storage or export policy. [[research-note-b.md]] [[research-note-c.md]]

A product owner must decide whether to run more research before choosing export, storage defaults, team permissions, or a broader PRD. Those decisions are not established by this packet. [[research-note-a.md]] [[research-note-b.md]] [[research-note-c.md]]

## 變更後來源

### research-note-c.md

```markdown
# Research note C — conflicting product request, revision 2

Fictional product-research note; no real participant or customer is represented.

A separate request asked for a source-linked review report that can be saved in the local workspace. It did not request CSV export. The same request still asked for automatic publishing after import, which conflicts with note B's local-only preference and note A's review-before-sharing preference. The sample is too small to resolve the conflict or justify a broad roadmap.
```

## 變更預期

The reference's statement that note C requested CSV export becomes stale. Revision 2 clarifies that the request was for a locally saved source-linked review report, not CSV export. The automatic-publishing conflict, narrow review-before-sharing decision, and unresolved storage or permission questions remain; a human product owner still decides whether more research is needed.

## 審查邊界

逐項對照筆記，特別檢查分享前審查、只在本地保存、自動發佈與匯出之間的衝突；儲存預設、權限與更廣泛需求仍待產品判斷。

## 比較

三份筆記可以用普通檔案比較。當修訂、矛盾請求，以及證據與產品判斷的界線需要在持續更新的 PRD 中保持可見時，來源連結的研究 wiki 才有幫助。

## 閱讀本地化頁面

https://wenlan.app/zh-TW/learn/build-product-research-knowledge-base-for-prd