建立产品研究知识库，再开始写 PRD

在 Wenlan 中查看这个示例

Wenlan v0.18.3 界面，呈现隔离测试后读回的数据。来源是虚构教学数据，参考答案为这次练习人工编写；画面没有展示 AI 自动生成或审批完成。

放大查看

全图放大细节

关闭图片

滑动图片，查看放大后的细节。

打开原图

放大查看

全图放大细节

关闭图片

滑动图片，查看放大后的细节。

打开原图

引用的来源变更后，Wenlan 将页面标记为过期，正文仍保留原文。这里的「updating…」表示等待重建，不代表已完成修正。请先检查变更的来源，再重建并审核新答案。

1. 01research-note-a.mdResearch note A — source-linked review+

   # 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.

2. 02research-note-b.mdResearch note B — local-only request+

   # 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.

3. 03research-note-c.mdResearch note C — conflicting product request+

   # 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.