Understand correspondence history¶
A memo or official letter can leave several kinds of evidence. Each answers a different question: what happened to the communication, who performed a recorded action, whether delivery succeeded, or what work contributes to reporting. Managers and support need to choose the evidence that matches the question.
Availability: This draft explains the inspected backend recording behavior. It adds no new screen sequence and does not establish connected frontend or environment delivery. Use the intended journeys in memo reading, letter reading and activity history; their availability limits still apply. Complete recording, access and recovery verification remains open.
Attachment viewing uses a separate document-access preparation recorder. Its entry concerns preparation of access, not proof that an attachment was read, approved or signed.
Choose the right evidence¶
| Question | Evidence to use |
|---|---|
| Was the memo approved, published, recalled or archived? | Its current status and available status History, interpreted with the memo lifecycle guide. Recipient history is narrower than management history. |
| Was the letter approved or issued? | Its current status and History, interpreted with the letter lifecycle guide. Issue and delivery are separate. |
| Who performed a recorded correspondence action? | The relevant entry in activity history, with its person, action, time and related communication. An entry describes that action's recorded result. |
| Did the letter reach its recipients? | The delivery attempt, outcome and evidence. Approval, issue and queue entries do not answer this question. |
| Was the letter filed into Records? | The completed filing result. A recorded request to file is an earlier step. |
| Why is work missing from a report? | The contribution and reconciliation evidence. Reporting evidence is a separate record with its own coverage and processing. |
Neither a document's History nor organization activity history is a complete transcript of every draft change, file opening, background callback or conversation. An edit entry does not contain the full previous and replacement document text. Use the authorized source communication and supporting records for those details.
Interpret a completed action precisely¶
The inspected correspondence recording path covers drafting and editing, submission, approval, rejection, recall, archive and requests to start workflow. It also covers memo publication and letter issue, queueing delivery, recording delivery evidence and requesting Records filing.
“Completed” describes the particular action recorded. A rejected memo can therefore have a completed rejection action. A completed request to start a workflow does not mean the workflow finished, and completed evidence recording can describe a failed or returned delivery. Read the action and its source result together.
Correspondence history relates these entries to the memo or letter. A letter's delivery action does not necessarily expose the individual attempt, recipient, delivery outcome or attached proof in the activity entry. Open the authorized delivery evidence when those details matter. A subject or title in history describes the recorded context; it is not a complete copy of the communication.
Background changes do not all pass through the same recording path. For example, receiving an automatic letter-delivery outcome and manually recording delivery evidence use different handlers. Do not expect an identical activity entry for every change shown in the letter's own status or evidence history.
Understand people and time¶
The person named in these activity entries comes from the identity available to the recording process. A memo's author, a letter's issuer, its signing authority and the person performing an action are distinct roles; do not substitute one for another when interpreting an entry.
The affected-person list is also selective. For memo publication, it uses people resolved from a saved audience; it is not a complete list of all saved recipient deliveries. Direct recipients can therefore receive the memo without appearing in that list. Other inspected correspondence actions supply no affected-person list, including letter delivery and evidence actions. An empty list does not establish that nobody was addressed or affected.
Most entries use the time saved for the corresponding stage of the communication. Workflow-start requests use the time of the request, and manual delivery-evidence recording uses the latest evidence recording time selected by the service. These times do not prove recipient reading, external delivery or completion of later work. An entry may become visible after the source action; see how activity is recorded.
When an action or its history is unavailable¶
Correspondence recording requires a usable sign-in identity, name and email. Establishing who an approved AI action represents does not, by itself, supply everything this separate recording step needs. The complete approved-action path still needs verification. An action can fail at this step even after a preview or approval was obtained.
The action attempts to record its history before finishing its save. A recording failure can stop the action. An engineering diagnostic showing that recording was attempted does not prove that the business change was saved or that its history is already visible.
| Situation | Safe interpretation and response |
|---|---|
| A document changed, but the expected activity is missing | Check the exact operation and which kind of history should record it. Support should reconcile saved source state and the recording path. Absence alone proves neither failure nor no action. |
| An approved AI action reports an identity or recording problem | Keep the original operation reference and check its saved result and current communication with support. Approval alone does not resolve the recording dependency. |
| A delivery action appears completed, but delivery is uncertain | Check the selected delivery attempt and evidence. Do not resend solely to obtain another history entry. |
| The affected-person list seems incomplete | Compare it with the communication's authorized recipient information. Do not treat the history list as a circulation list or readership report. |
| A retry appears to produce another entry | Ask support to distinguish a repeated business request from repeated delivery of the same history event. Similar wording is not enough to establish duplication. |
Use the recovery guidance for the original action before trying again. A new workflow, delivery or filing request can create additional work; recreating the business action is not a general history-repair mechanism. Provide the organization, memo or letter reference, approximate time, action and original operation reference through an approved support channel. Keep confidential content and credentials out of public messages.
Responsibilities and limits¶
Correspondence staff should check the communication's actual state and evidence. Managers should distinguish approval, circulation, delivery, acknowledgment and filing when interpreting progress. Administrators and support must reconcile identity and recording failures without treating a missing history entry as permission to repeat protected work.
This guide establishes no new price, retention duration, complete audit guarantee or compliance certification. Access to history does not automatically grant access to its related communication or files. The history lifecycle guide describes retention and data-request boundaries separately.