Review a source reference after the source file changes

A source revision changes the evidence relationship

Tie the review to the document version so a later correction does not silently rewrite the evidence behind the workbook.

In ParseMill, select an extracted invoice field to inspect its source, correct the value and export the reviewed workbook. Try your own invoices as well as the interactive sample. Compare upload, checking and correction time with your current way of building the same spreadsheet.

Do not transfer approval merely because most visible values look unchanged. Determine which fields and source locations changed, then review the affected relationships and any broader scope the revision could influence.

Use a revision-impact fixture

The fixture shows that unchanged numbers do not guarantee unchanged evidence. A moved table may require reference repair even if every raw value survives. Conversely, a corrected result requires reviewing derived calculations even when its page position remains stable.

W3C: Data on the Web Best Practices recommends version indicators and history. Preserve the old and new source identities so the change can be explained and reproduced.

Review the revision systematically

1. Save the new source as a separate version and record how it relates to the earlier document. Confirm that it is an authorized replacement or correction.
2. Compare page inventory, report identity, relevant values, units and notes. Create an impact list before replacing output references.
3. Re-extract or repair affected fields and source links using the new version. Verify the resulting evidence against the correct record and heading.
4. Issue a new output revision with the review scope, unresolved changes and a clear relationship to the superseded export.

W3C: Provenance model primer describes derivation and revision relationships. Use them conceptually to distinguish an old reviewed entity from a new entity that still needs review.

Keep unchanged scope defensible

A limited re-review may be reasonable when the source change is clearly bounded and its effects are understood. Record that rationale and the checks used to establish the boundary. If page order or table structure changes broadly, a wider review may be necessary.

Avoid updating a shared link to point to the new file while leaving the old approval record untouched. That makes the signoff appear to cover evidence the reviewer never saw. Preserve access to the version that actually supported the earlier decision.

Check the replacement handoff

The fixture’s new export must resolve its references in revision 2 and identify which earlier export it replaces. Recipients should know whether values changed, evidence locations changed or both. Keep the correction notice with the version history.

When a supplier replaces an invoice PDF, compare the revised invoice and exported workbook with the earlier version before using it. Include this source check when assessing ParseMill’s review process; an older approval does not establish the new document’s correctness.