# Verification record — `ch/zh/sta/liegenschaftenverzeichnis` v1.0.0 This file is the **source-review record** for this document version, per the [`manual-source-review-v1`](../../../../../practices/manual-source-review-v1.md) practice. ## Current claim - **`status`:** `draft` - **`verification.method`:** `manual-source-review-v1` - **`verification.lastVerifiedAt`:** `2026-07-09` - **`maturity.level`:** `structural-reference` ## Why this cycle picked up the Liegenschaftenverzeichnis This is the recurring "GovSchema Standard Research" cycle (**GOV-1889**). The prior cycle (GOV-1882), which authored the Aus- und Weiterbildungskosten schedule, left three companion schedules as an open backlog list: Liegenschaftenverzeichnis (real-estate register), Schuldenverzeichnis (debts register), and Hilfsblatt A/B/G (self-employment worksheets). `CATALOG.md`'s own "Known Gaps" list repeated this open list verbatim after GOV-1882 merged, noting none had yet been screened for tractability. This cycle's reconnaissance confirmed the Liegenschaftenverzeichnis is a genuine, current, unauthenticated, flat (non-AcroForm) PDF, and picked it as the strongest remaining candidate: real-estate ownership is common among Swiss filers, and unlike Schuldenverzeichnis (debts) or Hilfsblatt A/B/G (self-employment, a materially narrower filer population), this schedule's own printed prose is unusually self-contained. This document closes that specific, named gap. It does not open a new vertical or jurisdiction — Switzerland remains at 2 of 6 verticals (DMV, Taxes) — but it further deepens the Taxes vertical's coverage of an already-open jurisdiction, leaving Schuldenverzeichnis and Hilfsblatt A/B/G as the two remaining open backlog candidates. ## Sources examined - **Document `(id, version)`:** `ch/zh/sta/liegenschaftenverzeichnis` / `1.0.0` - **Spec version:** GovSchema `0.3.0` - **Authority:** Kanton Zürich — Finanzdirektion, Kantonales Steueramt Zürich (same authority as the main return and its four other companion schedules; this form's own printed issuer is "StA Form. 350"). - **Primary source:** — "StA Form. 350 (2025) 12.25 — Liegenschaftenverzeichnis," fetched directly (HTTP 200, `content-type: application/pdf`, `%PDF-1.4`, 71,322 bytes — byte size independently reconfirmed against this cycle's own reconnaissance finding — no `/Encrypt`, no login/CAPTCHA/WAF gate). - **A note on this form's URL and its own 'Jahr' box.** Unlike its four sibling companion schedules (Wertschriften- und Guthabenverzeichnis, Berufsauslagen, Versicherungsprämien, Aus- und Weiterbildung), each hosted at a yearly `.../2025/est-formulare/...` path and each carrying "2025" in its own printed cover title, this form is hosted at a **year-independent** `.../jahrunabhaengig/est-formulare/...` path, and its own cover page carries no tax year at all — instead, p.1 prints a standalone 4-box "◂ Jahr" entry field immediately below the household header. This is disclosed as an observed structural difference, not treated as a discrepancy: the printed template is evidently reused across tax years without a per-year reprint (the sibling schedules are reprinted yearly only because their own box contents — e.g. Wertschriften' "Steuerwert am 31.12.2025" column header — are themselves year-specific text, whereas nothing on this form's own face is). This document models the 'Jahr' box as its own required `taxYear` field for exactly this reason: it is the only member of the five CH-ZH companion schedules where the tax year is genuinely filer-entered data, not an assumption baked into the schema version. - **Companion Wegleitung, examined for rule confirmation and a worked specimen:** — the same 40-page "Wegleitung zur Steuererklärung 2025" every prior CH-ZH cycle has used, fetched the same way (HTTP 200, 1,497,565 bytes, 40 pages, `%PDF-1.7`). Its pp.28-30 (PDF pages 28-30) carry this form's own explanatory section ("Liegenschaftenverzeichnis"), used to confirm: - the Eigenmietwert (imputed rental value) computation basis differs by property category: for a single-family house or a condominium unit, the value is the one the Regierungsrat's own valuation instruction (ZStB 21.1) assigns, communicated to the taxpayer directly by the Gemeindesteueramt (municipal tax office) — **not filer-computed**; for a self-occupied unit inside the owner's own multi-family or business building, the filer enters 70% of the rent the unit would achieve if let to a third party — **filer-computed**; - the deductible maintenance/management cost is claimed per property as either a flat 20%-of-declared-gross-rental-income allowance (pauschal — "Die Pauschale wird in Prozenten des deklarierten Bruttomietertrages berechnet ... und beträgt 20% für jede Liegenschaft") or itemized actual costs (effektiv), mutually exclusive per property, with the flat-rate election disallowed outright for a predominantly commercially-used property; - the Vermögenssteuerwert (net-wealth assessed tax value) of a multi-family or business building is itself computed via a capitalization formula (`Vermögenssteuerwert = Bruttojahresertrag x 100 / 7.05`), yet — per p.30's own "Übertrag in die Steuererklärung" instruction — this value transfers into the **Verkehrswert** column/Ziffer 31.1, not the "Ertragswert (Land- oder Forstwirtschaft)" column/Ziffer 31.2, which the same instruction confirms is reserved strictly for genuinely agricultural- or forestry-classified land ("Das Total der Vermögenssteuerwerte von land- und forstwirtschaftlichen Liegenschaften ... Ziffer 31.2 ... Das Total der Vermögenssteuerwerte aller übrigen Liegenschaften ... Ziffer 31.1") — this was the single most easily-misread structural detail on this form (the "Ertragswert" sub-heading printed directly under the p.1 "Steuerwert (siehe Wegleitung Ziffer 31)" umbrella heading could be misread as a general "capitalized value" column rather than the narrower "agricultural/forestry only" column it actually is), resolved only by reading the Wegleitung's own p.30 prose rather than the form's own two-word column sub-heading in isolation; - both Steuerwert figures are, in the ordinary case, values the Gemeindesteueramt already assigned and communicated to the taxpayer via its own Liegenschaftenbewertung notice, not independently computed by the filer from scratch ("Die entsprechende Liegenschaftenbewertung wird Ihnen vom Gemeindesteueramt der Liegenschaftengemeinde zugestellt"; the Wegleitung's own p.38 marginal note repeats: "Falls Sie den Steuerwert Ihrer Liegenschaft nicht kennen, gibt Ihnen das Gemeindesteueramt gerne Auskunft") — this is the disclosed basis for treating both Steuerwert total fields as plain `number` transfer fields rather than fields with any derivation/formula semantics of their own. - **No dedicated worked specimen of this exact form exists in the Wegleitung — a disclosed negative finding**, the same class of finding the aus-und-weiterbildungskosten cycle (GOV-1882) made for Form 367. This was confirmed three ways: (1) a full-text scan for the literal footer string "StA Form. 350" across all 40 Wegleitung pages returns PDF pp.14, 28, 29, and 30 — each carrying only this form's own **blank** reference facsimile as a background/reference layer behind the explanatory prose (a print- layout artifact shared with every other companion schedule's own explanatory section, e.g. p.14 also carries Berufsauslagen's own blank facsimile behind its unrelated Schuldzinsen prose); (2) a page-by-page scan for "Beispiel"/"Muster" tokens locates the Wegleitung's own worked household specimen (Muster-Meister Felix und Regula) spanning PDF pp.33-38, whose own stated assumptions explicitly include "selbstbewohnte Liegenschaft" (a self-occupied property) — so a property genuinely exists in this specimen — yet its own per-property Form-350 breakdown (Ort, Strasse, Art, Fläche, the two Steuerwert columns, the Eigenmietwert/rental- income split, and the maintenance-cost method) is never shown; only the two aggregate transfer figures this schedule would have produced are visible on the specimen's own main-return pages, rendered to PNG and read directly: PDF p.35 (main return page 2, "Einkünfte 2025") shows line 188 (Nettoertrag aus Liegenschaften) = **CHF 15'680**; PDF p.38 (main return page 4, "Vermögen") shows line 421 (Ziffer 31.1, Verkehrswert) = **CHF 1'050'000** and line 422 (Ziffer 31.2, Ertragswert/Land- oder Forstwirtschaft) left **blank** (no agricultural/forestry property in the specimen household); (3) neither pp.28-30's own explanatory prose nor any other Wegleitung page shows a filled property-level line item for this form. This negative finding is disclosed explicitly rather than silently worked around: this schema's own worked mock-data example (below) is independently constructed and hand-recomputed, not matched against an official specimen, though its own order of magnitude (a CHF 780'000 self-occupied single-family house, versus the specimen's CHF 1'050'000 property) was deliberately kept broadly comparable to the Wegleitung's own aggregate figures as a plausibility cross-check, not as a claim of matching any official worked example. - **Extraction method.** `pdfjs-dist` (v3.11.174, `legacy/build/pdf.js`) text extraction with full `(x, y)` coordinates per text item, plus a `pdf-lib` AcroForm check (`form.getFields()`) and a `pdfjs-dist` per-page annotation check (`page.getAnnotations()`, filtered to `subtype === 'Widget'`). Both checks returned **zero** fillable widgets across both pages — the same flat, non-AcroForm, print/reference-facsimile shape as all four sibling companion schedules. Both pages were additionally **rendered to PNG** (`pdfjs-dist` + `node-canvas`, 2.5x scale) and visually cross-checked against the extracted text before any field name was assigned. This rendering pass is what resolved: - the exact two-column split on p.1 ("Ertragswert / Land- oder Forstwirtschaft" at boxes 5531-55310, vs. "Verkehrswert" at boxes 5541-55410), each column headed "CHF" with no "ohne Rappen" (without centimes) qualifier explicitly printed — unlike the main return's own page headers — but each entry box in the rendered image is a single-digit slot with no decimal notch, confirming whole-CHF entry, the same convention this registry applies elsewhere (Judgment call 4 below); - the p.2 "pauschal"/"effektiv" maintenance-cost choice rendered as two stacked line items per property (e.g. "5731 pauschal" directly above "5741 effektiv" for property 1), confirming these are mutually exclusive alternative entry lines, not two simultaneously-fillable amounts; - that box `151`-style qualified-participation-style side annotations do not exist on this form (unlike Wertschriften's own box 151) — the p.1 "Land- oder Forstwirtschaft" text is a column sub-heading, not a checkbox or separate box, confirmed by its position directly beneath "Ertragswert" and its complete absence from the pdf-lib/pdfjs Widget scan. - **Retrieved / reviewed:** 2026-07-09. - **Reviewer:** GovSchema Engineering (Standards Engineer — initial authoring source review). ## Scope decision: the 10-property repeating table collapsed to one free-text field GovSchema v0.3 fields are flat: there is no `array`/nested-object element type yet (`array`/nested `object` are proposed only in [GSP-0009](../../../../../spec/proposals/0009-composite-repeating-values.md), not accepted). The form's own property table has 10 printed rows spanning both pages (p.1: Ort/Kanton-Land/Strasse/Art/Fläche plus the two Steuerwert columns; p.2: the Eigenmietwert/rental-income split, the maintenance-cost method and amount, and the resulting net remaining income — all linked to the same property by row number) — genuinely unbounded cardinality in practice (a filer with more than 10 properties continues onto a separate Beiblatt zum Liegenschaftenverzeichnis). Modelling 10 x roughly a dozen distinct values per property as fixed slots would misrepresent the form's own unbounded, repeating nature and would not scale past 10 anyway. Per this registry's established treatment of exactly this situation elsewhere (`ch/zh/sta/wertschriften-und-guthabenverzeichnis`'s own 24-row `securitiesAndHoldingsDetails`; `ch/zh/sta/berufsauslagen`'s own private- vehicle commuting sub-table), the whole table — both pages, linked by property number — is collapsed into one `propertyInventoryDetails` free-text field, with a full description of the values each entry is expected to carry. ## Scope decision: the Beiblatt zum Liegenschaftenverzeichnis is a pass-through total, not modelled Consistent with the main return's own exclusion of this entire document as a companion schedule, this document in turn excludes its own companion sub-schedule: the **Beiblatt zum Liegenschaftenverzeichnis** (continuation sheet for properties beyond the 10 printed rows, confirmed by the Wegleitung's own repeated cross-references to be a distinct, separately- published form available from the Gemeindesteueramt or `www.zh.ch/steuern`). It is represented only as (a) three plain numeric transfer fields (`transferFromBeiblattErtragswert`, `transferFromBeiblattVerkehrswert`, `transferFromBeiblattVerbleibenderErtrag`) — the literal entry boxes printed directly on *this* form (557, 558, 578) — and (b) a `documents[]` supporting-evidence requirement gated on any of those three transfer fields being greater than zero. ## Scope decision: no declaration/signature block on this document (unlike Wertschriften) Unlike `ch/zh/sta/wertschriften-und-guthabenverzeichnis` (which carries its own "Ort und Datum" signature line and declaration statement, since it makes an independent withholding-tax refund claim, "mit Verrechnungsantrag"), this form's own two pages carry **no** signature block, declaration statement, or "Ort und Datum" line of any kind — confirmed by a full-text search of the extracted content of both pages. This is consistent with the Wegleitung's own "Beilagen zur Steuererklärung" (p.31) checklist, which lists this form simply as an attachment ("Liegenschaftenbesitzer: Liegenschaftenverzeichnis mit allfälligen Beiblättern") to be filed alongside the main return, whose own page-4 declaration ("Diese Steuererklärung ist vollständig und wahrheitsgetreu ausgefüllt") already covers every attached schedule. No `declarationAttestation` document entry is therefore modelled on this document, unlike its Wertschriften sibling. ## Field-by-field source mapping - **Tax year** (p.1, "◂ Jahr" box) → `taxYear`. See the dedicated note above on why this field exists on this schedule alone among the five CH-ZH companion schedules. - **Household header** (p.1, AHVN13/Gemeinde/Name/Vorname) → `ahvn13RemainingDigits`, `gemeinde`, `name`, `vorname` — the same header shape and field-naming convention as `aus-und-weiterbildungskosten` and `versicherungspraemien` (collected once per household, not per person). - **Property inventory** (p.1, "Liegenschaft 1" through "Liegenschaft 10" blocks; p.2, the per-property income/cost table) → `propertyInventoryDetails`. See scope decision above. - **Continuation-sheet transfers** (p.1 boxes 557/558; p.2 box 578) → `transferFromBeiblattErtragswert`, `transferFromBeiblattVerkehrswert`, `transferFromBeiblattVerbleibenderErtrag`. - **Headline totals** (p.1 boxes 3952/3951; p.2 box 3953) → `totalErtragswertLandwirtschaft`, `totalVerkehrswert`, `netRealEstateIncome`. The second and third transfer directly onto the main return's own `realEstateMarketValueWealth` (Ziffer 31.1) and `netRealEstateIncome` (Ziffer 6) fields; the first onto `realEstateIncomeValueWealth` (Ziffer 31.2) — confirmed by cross-reading the main return's own field descriptions, which already name this document as their source. - **Supporting-evidence references** → the 3 `documents[]` entries (`rentalIncomeStatementMieterspiegel`, `maintenanceCostStatement`, `continuationSheetBeiblatt`), the first two left ungated (their triggering condition — a rented unit, or the "effektiv" cost method — lives inside the collapsed free-text field and cannot be structurally gated, the same treatment `wertschriften-und-guthabenverzeichnis` gives its own ungated `originalCertificatesForLargeDomesticGamingWinnings` entry), the third `requiredWhen` any of the three Beiblatt transfer fields is greater than zero. ## Mock-data test run Per the issue's phase-3 instruction to test-run the schema with valid mock data, a one-off Node.js script (not committed to the repo) implementing the same `equals`/`in`/`greaterThan`/`all`/`any`/`not` `Condition` grammar as GSP-0013 checked the one `requiredWhen` constraint on `documents[]` against three scenarios: ``` OK Scenario 1: single self-occupied property, no continuation sheet OK Scenario 2: two properties (one self-occupied, one rented) plus a Beiblatt transfer, continuation-sheet document supplied FAIL Negative control: Beiblatt transfer amount present without the continuation-sheet document (expected FAIL) - MISSING required document: continuationSheetBeiblatt ``` **Scenario 1** (the conformance fixture, `conformance/ch/zh/sta/liegenschaftenverzeichnis/1.0.0/application-packet.json`) models a single filer in Uster with one self-occupied single-family house in Uster, ZH: Verkehrswert CHF 780,000 (transfer value from the Gemeindesteueramt's own Liegenschaftenbewertung notice); Eigenmietwert Total CHF 18,200 (Wohnungen/Zimmer/Garagen CHF 18,200, Gewerblich CHF 0); flat 20% maintenance-cost allowance = CHF 3,640 (20% x 18,200 = 3,640, exact); Verbleibender Ertrag = CHF 14,560 (18,200 - 3,640 = 14,560, exact). No continuation sheet needed (all three Beiblatt transfer fields are absent/ zero). `totalVerkehrswert` = CHF 780,000 (single property, no Beiblatt transfer). `netRealEstateIncome` = CHF 14,560 (single property, no Beiblatt transfer). **Scenario 2** (VERIFICATION-only, not committed as a second conformance fixture) models a joint filer with two properties plus one continuation- sheet-transferred property: Property 1, the same self-occupied Uster house as Scenario 1 (Verkehrswert CHF 780,000; Verbleibender Ertrag CHF 14,560). Property 2, a rented multi-family building in Zürich whose own assessed Vermögenssteuerwert is capitalization-formula-derived: Bruttojahresertrag CHF 84,600 -> Vermögenssteuerwert = 84,600 x 100 / 7.05 = CHF 1,200,000 exactly (posts to the **Verkehrswert** column per the Wegleitung's own p.30 instruction, not the Ertragswert/Land-oder-Forstwirtschaft column, since a multi-family building is not agricultural/forestry land); Eigenmietwert/ rental income Wohnungen/Zimmer/Garagen CHF 80,000, Gewerblich CHF 4,600, Total CHF 84,600 (matching the Bruttojahresertrag used in the capitalization formula); actual (effektiv) maintenance costs of CHF 22,000 (triggering the ungated `maintenanceCostStatement` document per the disclosed scope decision); Verbleibender Ertrag = 84,600 - 22,000 = CHF 62,600 (exact). A third property (a small parcel of leased agricultural land) is declared on a continuation sheet: `transferFromBeiblattErtragswert` = CHF 45,000 (an agricultural/forestry Ertragswert, correctly posted to the Ertragswert column since it is genuinely agricultural land, unlike Property 2's capitalized value); `transferFromBeiblattVerkehrswert` = CHF 0; `transferFromBeiblattVerbleibenderErtrag` = CHF 2,000. Totals: `totalVerkehrswert` = 780,000 + 1,200,000 + 0 = **CHF 1,980,000** (exact); `totalErtragswertLandwirtschaft` = 0 + 0 + 45,000 = **CHF 45,000** (exact); `netRealEstateIncome` = 14,560 + 62,600 + 2,000 = **CHF 79,160** (exact, verified: 14,560 + 62,600 = 77,160; 77,160 + 2,000 = 79,160). The negative control confirms the evaluator actually enforces `requiredWhen` on `documents[]` (a Beiblatt transfer amount without the mandatory continuation-sheet document itself being supplied) rather than trivially passing everything. No defects were found in the schema itself. Both registry validators were run against the schema document itself and pass: ``` $ node tools/validate.mjs registry/ch/zh/sta/liegenschaftenverzeichnis/1.0.0/schema.json ok registry/ch/zh/sta/liegenschaftenverzeichnis/1.0.0/schema.json 1/1 document(s) passed. $ node tools/validate-ajv.mjs registry/ch/zh/sta/liegenschaftenverzeichnis/1.0.0/schema.json ok registry/ch/zh/sta/liegenschaftenverzeichnis/1.0.0/schema.json [v0.3] 1/1 document(s) validated against the meta-schema (ajv 2020-12). ``` ## What is NOT modelled (out of scope), and why - **The Beiblatt zum Liegenschaftenverzeichnis** (continuation sheet for properties beyond the 10 printed rows) — a distinct, separately-published PDF; represented only as pass-through transfer totals and a gated `documents[]` entry. See scope decision above. - **Per-property breakdown of the 10-row table** — collapsed into `propertyInventoryDetails`. See scope decision above. - **The official property-valuation notice (Liegenschaftenbewertung)** the Gemeindesteueramt sends the taxpayer — not itself an attachment this form's own Wegleitung asks the filer to submit with the return (the Wegleitung's own "Beilagen zur Steuererklärung" checklist, p.31, lists only "Liegenschaftenverzeichnis mit allfälligen Beiblättern," not the valuation notice itself). - **A declaration/signature block** — this form carries none of its own; see the dedicated scope decision above. ## Judgment calls 1. **`propertyInventoryDetails` collapses both pages' per-property data into one field**, rather than splitting page-1 (location/type/area/Steuerwert) and page-2 (income/maintenance-cost/net-income) data into two separate free-text fields. Because every value on both pages is linked to the same property by an identical row number (property 1's p.1 data and property 1's p.2 data describe the same physical property), a single consolidated per-property record more faithfully represents the form's own conceptual unit (one property, one set of facts) than two artificially-separated free-text blobs would. 2. **`totalErtragswertLandwirtschaft` is `required: false`; `totalVerkehrswert` and `netRealEstateIncome` are `required: true`.** Almost every filer who completes this schedule owns at least one non-agricultural property (single-family house, condominium, etc.), so the Verkehrswert total and the net-income total are populated (even as zero) by virtually every filer of this schedule; the agricultural/forestry Ertragswert total applies only to the minority of filers who hold farmland or forestry land, mirroring the precedent `wertschriften-und-guthabenverzeichnis` set for its own required-core/optional-subtotal split. 3. **Both Steuerwert total fields, and the two per-property Steuerwert entries inside `propertyInventoryDetails`, are modelled as plain `number` fields with no derivation semantics**, consistent with the disclosed finding that these are, in the ordinary case, transfer values the Gemeindesteueramt already assigned, not filer-computed formulas — even though the Wegleitung discloses the underlying capitalization formula for a multi-family/business building's own assessed value. GovSchema v0.3 has no field-level formula/derivation member in any case ("Calculated / derived fields" remains deferred per SPEC.md §16), so this is consistent with the registry's existing practice elsewhere, not a special accommodation for this document. 4. **Amounts are modelled as plain `number` fields in whole CHF.** This form's own column headers print "CHF" without an explicit "ohne Rappen" qualifier (unlike the main return's own page headers), but the rendered page image confirms every entry box is a single-digit slot with no decimal notch — consistent with whole-CHF entry, the same convention this registry applies to its sibling companion schedules. 5. **`jurisdiction.level` is `subnational` with `subdivision: "CH-ZH"`**, identical to the main return and its four other companion schedules, since this is the same cantonal tax authority's own companion form, not a federally standardized schedule. 6. **`taxYear` is modelled as a required field, uniquely among the five CH-ZH companion schedules.** See the dedicated note under "Sources examined" above: this is the only one of the five hosted at a year-independent URL and carrying a genuinely filer-entered tax-year box on its own face, rather than a year baked into the printed template. 7. **No live submission was attempted** — filing a real Swiss cantonal tax return attachment is a real legal act with a real cantonal tax authority, not a safe or reversible action to simulate against a live government process, consistent with this registry's standing discipline. ## Access notes No access blocks: `zh.ch` was reachable directly from this environment with plain `curl` for both this form and the Wegleitung — no TCP-level reset, WAF, or CAPTCHA gate encountered, consistent with every prior CH-ZH cycle's finding that `zh.ch`'s own tax-forms domain is unblocked. ## Scope and jurisdiction notes - This is Switzerland's sixth Taxes-vertical document (a companion schedule to the main return, `ch/zh/sta/steuererklaerung-natuerliche-personen`), not a new vertical or jurisdiction; Switzerland remains at 2 of 6 verticals. - `id` reuses the `sta` authority-directory segment (the same cantonal tax office) and the form's own official title, ASCII-folded, as its slug: `liegenschaftenverzeichnis`. - Conditional requiredness uses `requiredWhen` (GSP-0013), targeting spec v0.3, consistent with the main return and every other document in this registry. No `edition` member is used, consistent with this registry's existing treatment of the other CH-ZH annual tax-year-specific schedules — even though this particular form's own hosting path is year-independent, its *content* (the tax year a given filing covers) is still scoped by the filer-entered `taxYear` field, not by a schema-version edition axis. ## Re-verification Per the practice's cadence, `nextReviewBy` is set to **2027-01-09** (6 months), the same cadence as the main return and its other companion schedules. Because `status` remains `draft`, a future review should prioritize: confirming the next tax year's edition of both this form and the main return keep the same box-reference numbering (557/558/578, 3951/3952/3953, and 5531-55310/5541-55410/5701-57010/5711-57110/5721-57210/ 5731-57310/5741-57410/5751-57510), confirming the form's own year- independent hosting path and "Jahr" box convention persists, and re-screening whether either of the two remaining companion schedules (Schuldenverzeichnis, Hilfsblatt A/B/G) has become a tractable next candidate.