A short, friendly update: entity grouping — announced on 2025-09-18 — is now actually implemented in the interactive demo. The parser now recognises grouped hidden declarations and applies the same modifier(s) to each listed entity. There is no UI change: this is a parsing/inspection improvement only.

What’s new

  • The demo parser recognises grouped hidden declarations like @@(A,B,C).Modifier(...) and treats them as if each entity had been individually annotated.
  • Grouping is strictly syntactic sugar: it does not create a new “group” entity, nor does it imply any structural relationship between members.

Core syntax

Grouping relies on the hidden-entity parentheses and commas as separators. The only supported, documented form for grouping is:

  • Hidden grouping using parentheses: @@(Name1,Name2,Name3).Modifier(...)

Key points:

  • Parentheses (...) delimit the group.
  • Commas , separate the entity names inside the parentheses.
  • Modifiers that follow are applied to each listed entity as if the annotation were duplicated for every member.
  • Nested groups (@@((A,B),C)) are not supported.

Examples

Inline example (short): @@(Claire,Antoine).age(26)

This is equivalent to writing the annotations separately:

@@Claire.age(26)
@@Antoine.age(26)

Block examples (copy/paste into the demo):

@@(Paris,Lyon,Marseille).Type(place)

@@(Sherlock,Watson).Dialog[
--- What do you think about it?
--- I am not certain, my friend.
]

Try it in the demo

Open the interactive demo, paste a grouped example, and watch cards and timeline pick up the resulting entities and modifiers.

Learn more in the original feature announcement. For the full syntax and technical details, see the specifications.

Feedback

We’d love to hear how grouping fits into your workflow. If you try it, please share examples, edge-cases or ideas on GitHub Discussions.

Thanks for trying the demo — slightly faster, and a little neater.