No response deadline: 119.07(1)(c) requires the custodian to acknowledge requests “promptly” and respond “in good faith” but sets no number of days, and these sections do not make silence a deemed denial, so no response step has a timer. The fixed periods in the text are the 30-day hold in (1)(h) and the 5-business-day pre-suit notice period in 119.12(1)(b); neither is a time limit for a response (see the record-hold and enforcement notes).
The text sets no form for the request: it need not be written, and nothing here lets the custodian require the requester's name or purpose. A written request matters only for the 30-day hold in (1)(h) and the pre-suit notice in 119.12.
Record hold (1)(h)-(i): even if the custodian says the record is not public, it may not be disposed of for 30 days after a written request, and if a civil action is filed within that period, only by court order after notice to all affected parties. This is a standing duty, not a step, and is not modelled as a timer.
Designee (1)(b): the custodian may designate another officer or employee to handle inspection and copying but must disclose the designee's identity to the requester; this optional step is folded into the custodian lane.
Exemption paths: state_basis is the unconditional (1)(e) duty whenever all or part of the record is claimed exempt. The written statement with particularity under (1)(f) is due only if the requester asks (condition reasons_requested) and is an optional branch: redaction and production of the remainder under (1)(d) follow state_basis directly (partly_exempt) and do not wait for it.
Exclusive choices after the response: after state_basis (or the optional written reasons) the flow goes to produce_remainder (partly_exempt), give_notice (refusal_contested) or record_withheld (refusal_accepted); after a partial release, the requester takes copies, inspects only, or contests. A requester who both takes the released part and sues over the redaction follows only one of those paths in the diagram; in law both can happen.
Contesting a refusal: give_notice can follow the response itself (for example a contested 'no record located' answer), the exemption statement, the written reasons, or a partial release, since 119.12(1)(a) covers any unlawful refusal to permit inspection or copying. A request the custodian simply ignores is not shown, because these sections attach no event or timer to silence.
Enforcement (119.12): written notice at least 5 business days before suit is a condition of a fee award, not of the right to sue, and it is excused under 119.12(2) when the agency does not prominently post its custodian's contact information in its primary administrative building and on its website. The notice period begins on the day the custodian receives the notice, excludes Saturday, Sunday and legal holidays, and must run out before suit is filed. It is a minimum wait, not a time limit to act within, so it is not attached as a timer: the schema's deadlines model time limits whose expiry ends or redirects the flow, and a timer on give_notice or file_suit would wrongly show the right lapsing once 5 business days pass. Suing before the period ends, or without notice, can still produce an order under 119.07(1)(g) but no fee award; the model always routes through give_notice and does not show the excused or no-notice path.
Court ruling: order_production follows 119.07(1)(g). In camera inspection is mandatory for the exemptions listed in (1)(g) and discretionary for 119.071(2)(c); it is not a separate step. On either ruling the court must then determine improper purpose under 119.12(3) (determine_purpose). The branches after it are award_costs when fee_award_due (the court found an unlawful refusal under 119.12(1)(a), notice was given or excused, and there was no improper purpose); costs_to_agency when improper_purpose, which bars a fee award to the complainant and can follow either ruling; and exemption_upheld when the exemption applies and the purpose was proper. When an improper purpose is found after a production order, the order still stands although the end event names only the cost award. 119.12(4) bars money damages.
Fees (4): inspection itself carries no fee in this text, but the special service charge in (4)(d) applies to records 'requested to be inspected or copied', so it can arise on inspection-only requests; the model applies it only on the copy path. County maps and aerial photographs (4)(b), and photographing records under (3) and (4)(e), are not modelled.
Electronic records: 119.01(2)(f) requires a copy in the medium requested if the agency keeps the record in that medium, with fees under 119.07(4) for unusual media or programming; remote electronic access under 119.07(2) is optional. These shape furnish_copies but are not separate steps.
An agency may not answer a request by suing the requester for declaratory relief on whether the record is public or exempt (119.07(9)). Ballot inspection (5), auditor access (6) and criminal discovery (8) are special cases not modelled.