docs: added Task notes for task3

Week-1/Task-3/TaskNotes.md

@@ -1,60 +1,121 @@
-# Task: [Feature Name]
+# Task: Duplicate Object / Duplicate Group
 
 ## Objective
-What is the feature trying to do?
+Duplicate an object and, if possible, duplicate a grouped structure.
+
+## Test File Split
+- Vanilla object duplication test: `main.js`
+- Vanilla group duplication test: `group.js`
+- R3F object duplication test: `src/App.jsx`
+- R3F group duplication test: `src/Group.jsx`
+- Run object test: default route
+- Command (Vanilla object): `npm run dev:object` or `yarn dev:object`
+- Command (Vanilla group): `npm run dev:group` or `yarn dev:group`
 
 ## Vanilla three.js
--Possible: Yes / Partial / No
--Notes:
--Key concepts:
--Complexity: Easy / Medium / Hard
+- Possible: Yes
+- Notes:
+- Object duplication is in `main.js` using mesh clone.
+- Group duplication is in `group.js` using `THREE.Group()` and group clone.
+- Transforms preserved: Yes, duplicate keeps copied transform values and can be moved independently after duplication.
+- Structure preserved: Yes, child hierarchy is preserved when duplicating a group.
+- Linked or independent: Mostly independent transforms, but geometry and material are shared by default unless explicitly cloned.
+- UX clean: Yes for developers, but requires code understanding.
+- Key concepts:
+- Object3D clone behavior
+- Shared vs cloned geometry and material
+- Complexity: Easy
 
 ## R3F
--Possible: Yes / Partial / No
--Notes:
--What R3F abstracted:
--Complexity: Easy / Medium / Hard
+- Possible: Yes
+- Notes:
+- Object duplication is in `src/App.jsx` using repeated meshes with shared geometry/material.
+- Group duplication is in `src/Group.jsx` by rendering the grouped component twice.
+- Transforms preserved: Yes, each instance has its own position, rotation, and scale.
+- Structure preserved: Yes, component tree/group structure is preserved.
+- Linked or independent: Instance transforms are independent; geometry/material may be shared or isolated depending on how props/instances are created.
+- UX clean: Yes, declarative and easier to scale.
+- What R3F abstracted:
+- Imperative clone calls become declarative repeated components/instances.
+- Complexity: Easy
 
 ## Thob Page Builder
--Possible: Yes / Partial / No
--Notes:
--Builder steps:
--Complexity: Easy / Medium / Hard
+- Possible: Yes
+- Notes:
+- There is a shortcut to duplicate objects.
+- Observed behavior: duplicate creates a completely different object that cannot be linked to the original, unlike vanilla and R3F patterns where sharing/linking behavior can be controlled.
+- Duplicate group behavior: Same as single object duplication, a complete copy is made with no linking.
+- Transforms preserved: Yes.
+- Structure preserved: Yes, as copy- paste duplication.
+- Linked or independent: Independent only, with no linking behavior available.
+- UX clean: Mixed. Shortcut is quick, but behavior is confusing because linked duplication is not possible.
+- Builder steps:
+- Create an object
+- Use duplicate shortcut
+- Duplicate a grouped structure and verify it is a full independent copy
+- Complexity: Medium
+
+## What to Observe
+- Are transforms preserved?
+- Vanilla: Yes
+- R3F: Yes
+- Thob: Yes
+- Does duplication preserve structure?
+- Vanilla: Yes
+- R3F: Yes
+- Thob: Yes, as full copy- paste duplication
+- Does the duplicate remain linked or independent?
+- Vanilla: Transform- independent, data can be shared by default unless cloned
+- R3F: Transform- independent, sharing depends on implementation
+- Thob: Independent only, no linking behavior
+- Is the UX clean?
+- Vanilla: Technical but predictable
+- R3F: Clean and scalable
+- Thob: Fast shortcut, but ambiguous result for duplication semantics
 
 ## Comparison Summary
--Possible in all 3? Yes / Partial / No
--Main differences:
--Where Thob is better:
--Where Thob is weaker:
--What feels awkward or unclear:
+- Possible in all 3? Yes
+- Main differences:
+- Vanilla and R3F give clear control over sharing vs independence.
+- Thob duplicate shortcut creates separate objects and does not support linked behavior.
+- Where Thob is better:
+- Fast editor action for simple duplication
+- Where Thob is weaker:
+- No linked duplication model
+- No linked group duplication model
+- What feels awkward or unclear:
+- No option to keep duplicates linked for synchronized edits
 
 ## Limitation Type (if any)
--[ ] Editor UX limitation
--[ ] Runtime limitation
--[ ] Schema / data model limitation
--[ ] Component limitation
--[ ] Event system limitation
--[ ] Asset pipeline limitation
--[ ] Unknown / needs investigation
+- [x] Editor UX limitation
+- [ ] Runtime limitation
+- [x] Schema / data model limitation
+- [ ] Component limitation
+- [ ] Event system limitation
+- [ ] Asset pipeline limitation
+- [ ] Unknown / needs investigation
 
 ## Workaround
--Is there a workaround?
--If yes, what is it?
+- Is there a workaround?
+- Yes
+- If yes, what is it?
+- Use reusable components/prefabs and instantiate multiple independent copies.
+- If linked behavior is required, use explicit shared data/component references where supported.
 
 ## Suggested Improvement
--What should improve in Thob?
--Is it:
-  -editor
-  -runtime
-  -component
-  -UX
-  -schema/data
+- What should improve in Thob?
+- Add explicit duplicate modes: independent duplicate and linked duplicate.
+- Add reliable deep group duplication with clear hierarchy preview.
+- it Is:
+- editor
+- schema/data
+- UX
 
 ## Difficulty Estimate
--Easy / Medium / Hard
+- Medium
 
 ## Business Value
--Low / Medium / High
+- High
 
 ## Recommendation
-Should Thob support this better? Why?
+Yes. Thob should support both independent and linked duplication because currently duplication works as copy-paste only, which limits synchronized workflows.