Pergola Wiki / Revision history and correction policy

Evidence-led knowledge base

Revision history and correction policy

Material site changes, source-review dates and the rules used to correct substantive errors.

2026-10-04 · site revision v6.9.0

Louvered-roof drainage claims, operating states and concealed water paths

Used a same-day cross-country, cross-window louvered and bioclimatic roof direction: French “pergola bioclimatique” held first place in the top-query list in all three windows; worldwide “louvered pergola” stayed inside the top 25 in all three windows; worldwide 24-hour “pergola lamellendach” rose 40%; Czechia's 24-hour top query “bioklimatická pergola” ranked first; and Great Britain's 24-hour rising list showed “pergola with retractable roof and sides” as a Breakout with “pergola with retractable roof” at +110% and “metal pergola with retractable roof” at +100%. The direction is directly pergola-relevant and free of brand, retail and place noise. The thinnest louvered-roof topic in the knowledge base — previously four registered sources, about 1,460 words, with no FAQ and no per-section source mapping — was therefore deepened instead of a near-duplicate page being created: four sections were added on the drainage claim belonging to one operating state, converting a declared flow into site rainfall, keeping the concealed path inspectable and cleanable, and freeze, snow and ice on a closed blade field. FAQPage grew from zero to two questions, per-section source mapping was added, and the topic was linked to louvered-bioclimatic. No new source was registered; two existing product-family sources were folded into the same-day source-check group — din-en-13561 (public DIN EN 13561 standard metadata placing pergola awnings in the external-blinds-and-awnings product family) and eu-2019-1188 (Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/1188 listing nominal and safety pressure classes for pergola awnings) — both read-only checked on 2026-10-04 at HTTP 200 with their per-source retrieval dates advanced (source governance 5.13 to 5.14). Every statement is bounded: a product class is not the capacity of the frame, anchorage, substrate or ground; the page sets no snow depth, clearing method, safe operating wind speed or approval outcome for any project; and independent external reviews remain zero. Trends are normalized sampled signals and do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority.

2026-10-03 · site revision v6.8.0

Pergola spelling variants, translations and near-neighbour word boundaries

Used a same-day cross-country, cross-window terminology and definition direction: Great Britain seven-day “pergoda or pergola” at +160% with “pergoda” at +60% (30-day +50%), worldwide 30-day “pergola synonym” at +150% and “pergola meaning” at +80%, worldwide 24-hour “what is pergola” in the top list, Italian 24-hour “pergola significato” at +350%, and Czechia seven-day “altan” at +250%. The direction is directly pergola-relevant and free of brand or place noise, so it produced accessible content instead of a report-only entry: the existing bilingual history-and-terminology topic gained a section on spelling variants and words for different objects rather than a near-duplicate page. The section separates four things that must not be merged: (1) translation — French pergola, German Pergola, Czech pergola, Turkish pergola and Spanish pérgola are each a language’s own record of the same Italian borrowing and change no structure, material or jurisdiction; (2) a spelling variant or misspelling — strings such as “pergoda” appear in search and retail text, but none of the language authorities cited here enters them as a headword, so they describe no different construction; (3) a word for a different object — the Czech Language Institute records altán as an open or glazed small garden or park structure (a besídka, a summerhouse or pavilion) and not as a pergola synonym; and (4) a product or marketing category — bioclimatic or louvered names an operating roof, not a definition. One new primary language source was read on 2026-10-03 with HTTP 200: the Internetová jazyková příručka entry for altán published by the Czech Language Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, giving the headword altán, hyphenation al-tán, masculine inanimate gender and full declension, and reprinting the ASCS and SSČ senses (an open or glazed small garden or park structure, a besídka; in architecture a low tower-like superstructure on a house). FAQPage grew from zero to two questions. Every statement is bounded as a language record: a dictionary entry, a variant spelling, a translated term and a brand name supply no span, section, material grade, weather performance, fire class or permit requirement, and none imports another jurisdiction’s approval route or another product’s declared performance. The Spanish RAE dictionary returned HTTP 403 to automated clients on 2026-10-03, so no definition was attributed to it. Trends are normalized sampled signals and do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-02 · site revision v6.7.0

Classifying overhead retractable shade, its wind area and its water path

Used a retractable-shade direction that has recurred across several days and windows: worldwide seven-day ‘retractable pergola shade’ at +60% and 30-day at +80%, Great Britain seven-day ‘pergola with retractable waterproof roof’ at +400% and ‘wooden pergola with retractable roof’ at +90%, and Great Britain 30-day ‘louvered pergola’ at +40%. The direction is directly pergola-relevant after filtering brand, retail and place noise (walmart retractable shade pergola price, purple leaf pergola, pergolux, white stores pergola and similar). To avoid a near-duplicate page, two sections were added inside the existing bilingual side-panel and shade-cover topic rather than a new article: first a classification of overhead retractable cover, frame-mounted retractable awning and vertical side screen, then what an overhead cover actually changes — catching and lifting area, self-weight, water path, snow and ice retention, stowed and power-loss states, and enclosure or approval questions. It relies on already registered primary sources: the public DIN EN 13561 standard metadata placing pergola awnings in the external-blinds-and-awnings product family, Regulation (EU) 2019/1188 listing nominal and safety pressure classes for pergola awnings, IEC 60335-2-97 on the safety of drives for awnings, blinds and similar equipment, and the existing ASCE 7, JRC Eurocode 1, U.S. DOE shading guidance, New Zealand MBIE unroofed-pergola exemption and England householder guidance. Every statement is bounded: a product class is not the capacity of the frame, anchorage, substrate or ground and sets no safe wind speed, snow depth or approval for any project. No product performance, certification, case or review claim was added and independent external reviews remain zero. Trends are normalized sampled signals and do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority.

2026-10-01 · site revision v6.6.0

Pergola naming, pronunciation and dictionary evidence boundaries

Used a same-day naming direction that repeated across windows and countries: Great Britain 30-day rising queries for ‘pergoda vs pergola’ at +180%, ‘pergoda’ at +60% and ‘pergola pronunciation’ at +100%, with worldwide 24-hour ‘pergola tarasowa’ at +40% and Turkish ‘bioklimatik pergola’ at +500%, and recurring Czech and Slovak aluminium-pergola queries. The direction is directly pergola-relevant and free of brand, place and news ambiguity, so it produced accessible content instead of a report-only entry: the existing bilingual history topic was deepened with a new section on naming, pronunciation and dictionary evidence rather than a near-duplicate page. Four institutional dictionary sources were read on 2026-10-01 and all returned HTTP 200: the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary entry for pergola (British /ˈpɜːɡələ/, North American /ˈpɜːrɡələ/, a definition as a wooden structure in a garden for plants to grow over and for people to sit or walk under, and a mid-17th-century English borrowing from Italian, from Latin pergula ‘projecting roof’, from pergere ‘come or go forward’); the Czech Language Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences entry giving the headword's hyphenation per-go-la, feminine gender and full declension and reprinting definitions of a light arbour of free-standing columns joined at the top and overgrown with climbers; the Duden entry for Pergola, hyphenated Per|go|la and glossed as ‘berankter Laubengang’; and the Turkish Language Association entry recording pergola as a loan from Italian with the single sense ‘gölgelik’. The section states that a dictionary entry, a variant spelling, a retail brand and a translated term are language records rather than structural, product or legal classifications, and that none of them supplies a span, section, material grade, weather performance, fire class or permit requirement. The same run closed two internal-navigation gaps by linking steel to aluminum and timber to sustainability and circular design. No structural, capacity, product or approval claim was added, and independent external reviews remain zero. Trends are normalized sampled signals and do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority.

2026-09-30 · site revision v6.5.0

Attached and lean-to pergolas: wall substrate, flashing, uplift restraint and approval layers

Deepened the existing bilingual attached-versus-freestanding topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a same-day cross-country, cross-window attached/lean-to direction in Google Trends: France 24-hour ‘pergola adossée 3x3’ as a Breakout with ‘pergola adossée’ in the top list, France seven-day ‘pergola adossée 4x3’ at +60%, Italy’s ‘pergola addossata’ present in the 24-hour, seven-day and 30-day top lists, and Great Britain 24-hour ‘lean to pergola with roof’ at +90% with 30-day ‘wall mounted pergola with roof’ at +80%. Four sections were added, a two-question FAQ extension took the FAQPage from four to six questions, a six-row attached-frame interface check was published as a decision tool, and per-section source mapping was widened to twelve sections. One new primary source was read on 2026-09-30 with HTTP 200 as a 44-page PDF: the American Wood Council DCA 6 Prescriptive Residential Wood Deck Construction Guide based on the 2015 International Residential Code. It applies to single-level residential wood decks attached to a house to resist lateral forces, requires the house band or rim joist to be capable of supporting the new structure and directs a non-ledger layout or full plan submission where that cannot be verified, prohibits ledger attachments to brick, masonry or stone exterior veneers, to hollow masonry and to cantilevered floor overhangs or bay windows, requires the exterior finish to be removed before the ledger is installed and approved corrosion-resistant flashing at every ledger-to-wall connection in wood-framed construction while warning that aluminium should not contact copper-containing preservative-treated lumber, and requires positive anchorage to the primary structure with hold-down tension devices of a stated allowable-stress-design capacity near the edge over sheathed wall framing. The document itself states that no assurance is given that designs and construction made in accordance with it meet the requirements of any particular jurisdiction. It is a United States prescriptive deck guide — not a pergola, terrace, balcony or roof standard — publishes no capacity, connection value or approval and is not transferred. The same run wired the GOV.UK building-regulations approval service page and the French Service-Public planning guidance into this topic for the first time: England treats planning permission and building-regulations approval as two separate questions, and French authorization depends on the local plan, location, classification and footprint, with neither transferred elsewhere. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, restaurant, hotel, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-28 · site revision v6.4.0

Waterproofing a pergola: cover options, wind-driven rain, temporary covers and claim boundaries

Deepened the existing bilingual waterproof, water-resistant and rain-shedding topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a same-day cross-country, cross-window covering direction in Google Trends: worldwide 24-hour ‘cover your pergola’ at +120%, worldwide 30-day ‘pergola with canopy’ at +90%, Great Britain 30-day ‘covered pergola’ at +90% with ‘waterproof pergola’ at +50%, and French seven-day ‘bache pour pergola’ at +60%. The topic had been one of the least sourced (two sources) and did not cover cover-option choice, the wind-driven-rain mechanism, temporary covers or the load and classification changes a cover introduces. Four sections were added, together with a six-question FAQPage, a six-row rain-cover due-diligence check and per-section source mapping, taking the topic from two to four registered sources. One new primary source was read on 2026-09-28: the US EPA Moisture Control Guidance for Building Design, Construction and Maintenance (EPA 402-F-13053), which sets out three moisture-control design principles — control liquid water, manage condensation and water-vapour movement, and control indoor humidity and moisture from materials and equipment — explains that liquid water leaks through holes, wicks through porous materials and runs along or beneath assembly surfaces, lists site drainage, gutter systems, above- and below-grade drainage planes, flashing, condensate drainage and humidity control as elements whose joints and penetrations must stay continuous, and states that it is not a textbook, code or standard. The remaining statements reuse registered sources: DIN EN 13561 standards-catalogue metadata, which treats external blinds and awnings as equipment fixed to a structure and gives them performance classes, so an awning class is not a structural rating for the carrying frame; the 2024 US IRC appendix; and ASCE 7. Every statement carries its jurisdiction: the United States federal moisture-control guidance, the European product-standard catalogue entry and the EU product boundary are not transferred into a universal watertightness class, a test method or a project approval, and the page rates no product and states no leakage rate or capacity. Trends are normalized sampled signals; hotel, brand, place and low-sample noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-27 · site revision v6.3.0

Open-rafter pergola build boundaries: set-out, bracing, work sequence and the self-build scope

Deepened the existing bilingual open-rafter topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a same-day cross-country and cross-window Google Trends direction for owner-built work: Great Britain 24-hour ‘diy pergola’ at +150%, Great Britain 30-day ‘building a pergola’ at +70%, and Czechia seven-day ‘pergola svépomocí’ at +90%. The topic had been one of the least sourced (three sources) and shortest articles in the knowledge base, and it did not cover set-out, lateral stability, the order of work or who may perform each part. Five sections were added, together with a six-question FAQPage, a six-row open-frame build hold-point check and per-section source mapping. One new primary source was read on 2026-09-27: HSE's Work at height: the law page, which states that the purpose of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 is to prevent death and injury caused by a fall from height, that the Regulations apply to employers and to those who control work at height — HSE gives a building owner who contracts others to work at height as an example — and that such work must be properly planned, supervised and carried out by competent people using the right equipment with the risks assessed first (the page shows an updated date of 2024-10-29). The remaining statements reuse registered sources: the US model-code patio-cover appendix, ASCE 7, AWC NDS, Eurocode 5, the Australian unroofed-pergola explanatory context, the GOV.UK building-regulations approval service page, the California CSLB licence lookup, New South Wales contractor qualification material and French decennial-liability insurance guidance. Every statement carries its jurisdiction: the Great Britain safety duty, the England approval route, the United States licence class and the French insurance condition are not transferred into a universal self-build or licence rule, and the article publishes no construction instruction, capacity, price or project outcome. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, place, restaurant, theatre, word-game and low-sample noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-26 · site revision v6.2.0

Small-site and balcony pergolas: clear rectangle, guarding, escape routes and layered approval

Deepened the existing bilingual size, layout and clearance topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a same-day cross-window and cross-country Google Trends direction: worldwide seven-day ‘pergola ideas for small gardens uk’ at +90% and 30-day +70% with small-size and roofed variants still appearing in the 24-hour list; Czechia seven-day ‘pergola na balkon’ at +140% with ‘pergola 2x3m’ as Breakout and ‘pergola 3x3m’ at +200%; and continued UK three-metre-square queries in the top lists. The topic was one of the least sourced (four sources) in the knowledge base, and constrained sites and raised support surfaces were almost entirely uncovered — ‘courtyard’ appeared nowhere on the site and ‘balcony’ only in a few neighbouring topics. Six sections, a six-question FAQPage, a constrained-site layout check tool and per-section source mapping were added. Four official primary sources were read on 2026-09-26: section 4.4 of the Scottish Government domestic building standards technical handbook, whose mandatory standard requires every sudden change of level accessible in or around a building to be guarded by pedestrian protective barriers, whose guidance gives a 600 mm level-difference threshold, requires openings in a barrier in and around domestic buildings to prevent the passage of a 100 mm diameter sphere, requires barriers to be designed so they cannot easily be climbed by young children with potential hand and footholds minimised and barriers to resist loads calculated to BS EN 1991-1-1 and PD 6688-1-1, and whose height table gives 1,100 mm for locations other than its listed cases; requirement K2 in Schedule 1 to the Building Regulations 2010 on legislation.gov.uk, under which stairs, ramps, floors and balconies and any accessible roof, and light wells, basement areas or similar sunken areas connected to a building, must be provided with barriers where necessary to protect people from falling; the GOV.UK Approved Document K publication page, which records that the current edition covers protection from falling, collision and impact including guarding in and around all types of buildings and that the Building Safety Regulator has had a review duty since April 2023 (only the page and its summary were read; the PDF was not extracted, so no clause value is attributed to it); and the GOV.UK building regulations approval page, which states that approval differs from planning permission and that both may be needed, that alteration projects can also trigger approval, and that a competent person scheme changes who obtains it, with separate rules in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The update separates the clear rectangle from the overall envelope, requires the route that must keep working to be reserved (noting that the ADA accessible-route 36 in / 32 in figures are one jurisdiction's rule), treats a balcony or roof deck as a structure rather than a larger patio, brings existing guarding and escape routes into the layout, and separates planning permission, building regulations approval and the consent of whoever controls the surface into three different questions. Every conclusion carries its jurisdiction: the Scottish figures, the England requirement and the United States accessibility dimensions are not transferred into universal dimensions or project approvals. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, restaurant, hotel, theatre, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-25 · site revision v6.1.0

Galvanizing, hollow sections and mixed metals: coating and detailing boundaries for steel pergolas

Deepened the existing bilingual steel topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a metal direction recurred across the same-day Google Trends sample: worldwide 24-hour top queries included pergola roof at 61 and metal pergola; Great Britain seven-day rising queries included metal pergola with retractable roof at +250%, metal pergola with roof at +50% and aluminum pergola at +70%; Czechia seven-day kovová pergola rose +50%, and Slovakia seven-day alu pergola rose +90% with a 30-day Breakout. The topic had been one of the shortest (about 1,312 words) and the least sourced (three sources) in the knowledge base, and one of its key takeaways — that hollow sections need a drainage or sealing strategy — had no supporting section or source. Five primary sources were read on 2026-09-25: the public abstract of ASTM A123/A123M-24, which sets out the scope of the hot-dip galvanized coating specification, its exclusions for steel galvanized on specialized or continuous lines and for steel thinner than 0.76 mm, and its explicit direction that hardware items to be centrifuged, such as bolts and similar threaded fasteners, follow A153/A153M; the public abstract of ASTM A153/A153M-23, which covers hot-dip zinc coatings on iron and steel hardware in Classes A, B, C and D, requires coating thickness or weight/mass to conform to the specified values for those classes and requires coated articles to be free from uncoated areas, blisters, flux deposits and dross inclusions; the Joint Research Centre directory page for Eurocode 3, which states that EN 1993 concerns resistance, serviceability, durability and fire resistance and lists EN 1993-1-2:2005 structural fire design and EN 1993-1-4:2006 stainless steels, and which states that EN 1993 is intended to be used with EN 1090 execution requirements; the Galvanizers Association design-detailing guidance, which explains immersion in a molten zinc bath at about 450 °C, requires correct venting and drainage for hollow sections and internal compartments, and states that galvanizing the internal surfaces eliminates the danger of hidden corrosion in service; and the American Galvanizers Association page on galvanic corrosion, which lists the four elements the mechanism requires — anode, cathode, electrolyte and return current path — and states that removing any one stops it. The update separates the coating document from the structural design, the hardware coating from the frame, treats vent and drain openings as a structural decision, reframes mixed-metal contact as an interface drainage and isolation question, and records that non-combustibility cannot stand in for a fire design. FAQPage grew from zero to seven questions. Every statement carries its jurisdiction and scope limits: the standards assign no design value, capacity, service life or project approval, and industry material is not transferred into a code. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, restaurant, hotel, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-24 · site revision v6.0.0

Reclaimed and pallet timber: packaging marks versus structural evidence

Used a same-day cross-window Google Trends direction: a global rising query recorded at +850% over seven days in the 08:05 CST sample and, in the 13:0x CST sample, as Breakout over seven days and +300% over 24 hours. The long-tail phrase itself is treated as ambiguous wording rather than as evidence, but the intent behind it — reusing pallets or reclaimed timber in a pergola — is a genuine gap in the knowledge base, so the existing bilingual timber topic was deepened instead of creating a near-duplicate page. Three primary sources were read on 2026-09-24: the IPPC publication page for ISPM 15, which describes phytosanitary measures for wood packaging material made from raw wood, includes dunnage, excludes processed packaging such as plywood and states that the measures are not intended to provide ongoing protection from contaminating pests or other organisms; the GOV.UK wood-packaging-material guidance, which applies ISPM 15 from 1 January 2021 to movements between Great Britain and other countries, lists pallets, box pallets, pallet collars and other load boards, crates and dunnage, records the processed/non-solid and 6 mm exclusions and requires membership of the UK Wood Packaging Material Marking Programme with six-monthly facility assessments; and European Commission plant-health requirements, under which wood packaging material and dunnage from non-EU countries must be heat treated or fumigated in line with ISPM 15 procedures, carry the official three-code mark with the IPPC logo and be debarked under Regulation (EU) 2016/2031. The update separates a packaging mark, which records a phytosanitary treatment and a registered producer, from structural evidence, which must state the species or species group, grade, durability class, any applicable preservative retention, moisture state and member condition; until that evidence exists, reclaimed pieces stay out of the load path. The FAQ page grew from six to seven questions. The article assigns no capacity, reuse approval, durability class or project outcome. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, place, restaurant and word-game noise was filtered. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-24 · site revision v5.9.0

Eurocodes second-generation transition: CEN timetable, scope changes and design-basis records

Deepened the existing Eurocodes topic rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after verification against two official European Commission Joint Research Centre pages. The update separates “a standard reaches the national standards bodies” from “an edition applies to a project”: the JRC programme page states that the second-generation family will include 11 European Standards and 2 Technical Specifications, in total 74 parts, that CEN makes the parts available after all Enquiries and Formal Votes close with a latest Date of Availability no later than 30 March 2026, and that the Date of Publication is the latest date by which each EN must be implemented nationally, with National Annexes prepared nationally afterwards. The second page summarises the programme changes: further harmonisation and ease of use, requirements for assessment, re-use and retrofitting of existing structures, strengthened robustness, a new Eurocode on structural glass, and pre-normative work with CEN Technical Specifications for fibre-polymer composites and tensioned membranes; the section connects them to ordinary pergola work such as adding glazing, heavier roofing, screens or heating and photovoltaic assemblies to an existing frame. A third section requires one record line per part (standard and part number, generation and edition, National Annex and its nationally determined parameters, amendment status, execution standard and the date checked) and treats any cross-generation value as an open question for the responsible designer. The article determines no project's applicable edition, National Annex availability, capacity or approval outcome, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-23 · site revision v5.8.0

England planning enforcement: statutory time limits, notices and retrospective permission

Deepened the England planning topic into a dedicated bilingual enforcement article after the same direct Google Trends direction appeared in two same-day samples: the global 30-day rising query ‘council forces homeowner remove pergola’ was recorded at +800% and then +850%, which is pergola-relevant, non-brand, non-place and clearly intentioned, so the signal produced accessible content rather than a report entry alone. Three official United Kingdom primary sources were read: GOV.UK Planning Practice Guidance on enforcement and post-permission matters (the amended section 171B time limits, the 25 April 2024 transitional boundary, the list of proportionate options and the single post-hoc permission opportunity with its section 70C and 174 limits), the legislation.gov.uk text of section 171B (ten years in England and four in Wales for operations and for change of use to a single dwellinghouse, ten years for other breaches, and further action within four years), and the GOV.UK enforcement-appeal guide (who may appeal, the requirement that the appeal be received before the notice takes effect, the Planning Inspectorate route, document requirements, no appeal fee unless permission is also sought, and the High Court route). A five-question FAQPage was published. The page is England-specific and does not transfer English periods or procedures to Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland. Trends remain normalized sampled signals and do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-23 · site revision v5.7.0

Timber-pergola grade, treatment, moisture and inspection boundaries

Deepened the existing bilingual timber topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a wood direction appeared in all four sampled Google Trends scopes: global 24-hour ‘pergola de madera’ +150%, Czech 30-day third-place and still-rising ‘dřevěná pergola’, French 24-hour second-place ‘pergola bois’ with ‘pergolas bois’ +120%, and Italian 24-hour ‘pergola in legno’. The update separates grade, durability and treatability; requires the species or species group, heartwood or sapwood, strength grade, supply moisture content and — for treated timber — the preservative and its retention or use category to be specified for each member's actual exposure; uses Swedish Wood's industry reference for hygroscopic behaviour, equilibrium moisture content and the links from moisture state to dimensions, strength and resistance to degradation; and uses the US EPA chromated-arsenicals page only as a US pesticide-registration and consumer boundary (voluntary discontinuation for homeowner uses in December 2003, no removal requirement for existing structures, possible reduced leaching with a penetrating coating) without transferring a durability class or another jurisdiction's rule. A new inspection and renewal section separates weathering from structural loss and requires the water and load cause to be removed first. FAQPage went from zero to six questions. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, restaurant, place, hotel and unrelated noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-17 · site revision v8.2.0

Nearby pergola builders: New Zealand practitioner boundaries and same-scope quote comparison

Used a direct cross-window Google Trends direction: worldwide 24-hour ‘pergola builder near me’ rose 50%; worldwide 30-day ‘local pergola builders’ rose 60%, with ‘pergola builder’ and ‘pergola builders’ up 50% and 40%; and New Zealand 30-day ‘pergola builder’ and ‘pergola installation’ were Breakout. The existing bilingual builder topic already treats nearby results as shortlist leads, so no near-duplicate page was created. Instead, the article now adds a New Zealand boundary and replaces its four-row evidence-package table with an eight-row same-scope quote comparison. A newly registered New Zealand MBIE page, updated 9 September 2026, states that all building work must meet the Building Code even without consent, that an LBP must carry out or supervise restricted building work, and that residential work at NZD 30,000 including GST requires a written contract, with a disclosure statement and standard checklist at the threshold or on request. The article explicitly does not treat every pergola as restricted building work or transfer New Zealand's contract threshold elsewhere. The tool aligns contracting identity, scope baseline, site interfaces, design and approval, product evidence, price and payment, changes and defects, and handover and service. One official source was added to governance; independent external reviews remain zero. Trends are sampled, normalized topic signals, not proof of demand size, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority.

2026-10-15 · site revision v8.0.0

Tarpaulins and pergola covers: classify first, then verify loads, drainage and filing

French 24-hour, seven-day and 30-day samples repeatedly showed bâche and clear-tarpaulin directions, while worldwide 24-hour results included ‘cover your pergola’ at +70% and New Zealand 30-day results showed covered pergola as Breakout. These are normalized sampled topic signals, not absolute volume or evidence of demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Using official DIN EN 13561 catalogue metadata, the European Commission JRC Eurocode 1 page and French Service-Public planning guidance, the bilingual rain-cover topic now identifies the exact product and its fixed, retractable or removable; water-shedding or porous; and permitted weather states before checking supported edges, load path, drainage, fixings and the local filing route. DIN's public scope excludes the carrying structure and excludes wind resistance of non-retractable products, so the article no longer presents ‘temporary’ or ‘remove before high wind’ as universal rules without product and project evidence, and it invents no grommet spacing or safe wind speed. French thresholds and procedures are not transferred elsewhere. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-14 · site revision v7.9.0

Mini pergolas and Irish planning boundaries

Used a direct signal repeated across windows: a worldwide seven-day small-backyard query rose 350%, a worldwide 30-day UK small-garden query rose 180%, and Ireland's ‘mini pergola’ had 24-hour relative interest of 44 and was Breakout at seven and 30 days. The existing size topic was deepened to state that mini is not a standard size or permit class. Ireland's original regulations, expressly unofficial 2001–2025 consolidation, OPR guidance and phased 2024 Act commencement status bound the Class 3 cumulative-area, retained-open-space, position, height, use and Article 9 checks. Rules are not transferred and proposed changes are not treated as current law. Trends prove no demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-16 · site revision v8.1.0

Bioclimatic pergola kits: delivery scope, performance documents and installation interfaces

Deepened the existing bioclimatic topic rather than creating a near-duplicate kit page after a direct cross-window signal: worldwide 24-hour ‘pergola bioclimatique en kit’ rose 4,400%, while the same French query was Breakout over 24 hours and remained up 70% over seven days. The update treats “kit” as a delivery and assembly description and requires five scopes to agree before the frame is fixed: ordered configuration and packing list; excluded interfaces; the exact product and intended use in applicable performance documents; site drawings and local approval; and installation, commissioning and handover records. The European Commission CPR portal and Regulation (EU) 2024/3110 only bound product-market documents versus project suitability; public DIN EN 13561 metadata only separates a pergola awning from its supporting structure; and French Service-Public only establishes that the French filing route depends on local planning, location, actual classification and footprint. One section, one visible FAQ with matching FAQPage data, and a title and summary that naturally answer the bioclimatic-pergola-kit intent were added. Trends are sampled, normalized topic signals—not proof of demand size, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. No specific product is evaluated, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-13 · site revision v7.8.0

Bioclimatic pergolas: rotating, stacking and fabric-retracting mechanisms

Used a directly relevant same-day direction after primary-source verification: worldwide 24-hour ‘bioklimatikus pergola’ was Breakout; French 24-hour ‘pergola bioclimatique rétractable’ and the French related topic ‘Pergola bioclimatique’ were also Breakout; worldwide seven-day ‘pergola med tag’ remained at +50%, while the French seven-day topic ‘Pergola bioclimatique’ rose 90%. The existing bilingual bioclimatic topic was deepened instead of creating a near-duplicate page. The new material separates rotating-only rigid louvers, rigid louvers that also stack or retract, and fabric pergola awnings, and requires a movement diagram, open, closed and stowed dimensions, drainage and overflow, drive and controller, power-loss state and exact declaration documents. The Czech MMR methodology is used only as a Czech classification example; Regulation (EU) 2019/1188 and public DIN EN 13561 metadata only bound the pergola-awning product family; and French Service-Public only establishes that the French filing route depends on the local plan, location, actual classification and footprint. One section, one visible FAQ with matching FAQPage data and a link to the retractable-fabric topic were added. Google Trends is a sampled, normalized topic signal and proves no demand size, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority; country rules are not transferred, a product family proves no frame or anchorage capacity, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-12 · site revision v7.7.0

DIY pergolas: approval, self-build eligibility and supervision boundaries

Deepened the existing open-rafter build topic and Czech permit topic, rather than creating near-duplicate country pages, after a cross-country self-build and kit direction: Slovakia seven-day ‘pergola svojpomocne’ at +130% and 30-day Breakout, with Czech seven-day ‘pergola stavebnice’ at +250%. The Czech Ministry for Regional Development's May 2026 page and March 2026 methodology separate permit status from who may perform the work: specified simple shelters allow self-build only with supervision or owner qualification conditions, while other shelters and the renewable-energy small-structure examples named in the methodology require contractor delivery and the stated professional management. Slovakia's current Building Act small-structure classification is used only to bound classification and does not prove a general right to self-build. Two sections, two visible FAQ questions with matching FAQPage data, and reciprocal article links were added. Trends are sampled, normalized topic signals—not proof of demand size, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority; country rules are not transferred, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-11 · site revision v7.6.0

Deflection and acceptance: the stiffness question behind a pergola size

After the size / clear-span direction persisted into a second day in the same-day Google Trends sample — Czechia 30-day top list with “pergola 6x4”, seven-day “pergola 6x4”, 30-day “pergola 5x4m” +190% and seven-day “pergola 3x5”; Slovakia 30-day “pergola 4x6” +28,700%; Italy 24-hour “pergola 6x5” +58,850% and “pergola 4x4” +180%; France 24-hour rising “pergola bioclimatique 6x3” and “6x4” with seven-day “pergola aluminium 6x4” +100% — this run did not repeat the frame-anatomy topic deepened on 2026-10-10 and instead took the follow-up question that direction leaves open: how stiff the frame has to be for its covering and its use. It deepened the thinnest engineering topic on the site, deflection and serviceability — about 1,560 words with four registered sources, no FAQ and no decision tool — with three sections, a four-question FAQPage published for this topic for the first time, a six-row deflection acceptance check and per-section source mapping. The first section separates a marketed size from stiffness: position and movement are two different checks, deflection of a uniformly loaded member under standard support conditions varies with the fourth power of the span while the bending moment varies with the square, and because the Aluminum Design Manual records aluminium's elastic modulus at roughly a third of steel's — about 70 GPa against about 200 GPa — an aluminium member of similar geometry deflects about three times as much under the same load, so deflection can govern a long span before resistance does; the AWC NDS, the Aluminum Design Manual and Eurocode 5 / STEP supply the wood, aluminium and serviceability frameworks. The second records that the acceptance limit follows the covering and the use rather than one number for the whole structure — an open frame, a rigid ceiling or brittle finish, a glazed or solid cover whose working fall must survive the movement, and a louver rail or carriage that binds long before it is at structural risk — and that the brief should state whether the limit is total movement or only live-load movement and which load case it belongs to. The third treats ponding as a design mechanism, where a sag flattens the fall, water collects and the added load increases the deflection again, so the fall, overflow and discharge point must still work at the expected movement and stay inspectable. Only already-registered sources were merged (AWC NDS, ASCE 7, the Aluminum Design Manual and Eurocode 5 / STEP); no new source was added, and no limit, span, capacity or approval outcome is published. A standing source-governance priority was also cleared: the dead fpl.fs.usda.gov PDF URL registered for the USDA Wood Handbook (FPL-GTR-282) was replaced with the current official US Forest Service Research and Development record page on research.fs.usda.gov (Treesearch record 62200, same document, read-only HTTP 200 on 2026-10-11, with the official PDF download from the same record), and asce-7, eurocode-9, aluminum-manual, awc-nds, eurocode-5 and usda-wood were folded into the same-day check group. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, retail, restaurant, hotel, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-10 · site revision v7.5.0

Nominal size and clear span: what decides pergola frame members

Deepened the existing bilingual frame-anatomy topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a same-day cross-country, cross-window size direction in Google Trends: Czechia 24-hour Breakout and seven-day +170% for “pergola 4x4m”, with 30-day “pergola 5x3m” +160%, “pergola 4x4” +110% and “pergola 5x4” +100%; Slovakia 30-day Breakout for “pergola 4x6”, “pergola 4x4m” +250% and 30-day “pergola 6x5” Breakout; Italy 24-hour “pergola bioclimatica 3x4” +300% with “pergola 3x4” +50%; France 24-hour top query “pergola 4x3” with seven-day “pergola bioclimatique 5x4” +60%; and worldwide 24-hour “pergola bioclimatica 3x4” +110%. The topic was one of the shortest and least sourced on the site — about 1,180 words with three registered sources — and did not explain what a marketed size actually commits structurally. Three sections, a four-question FAQPage published for this topic for the first time, and a six-row nominal-size-to-span check were added, together with per-section source mapping. The first section separates the catalogue size from the clear span: the figure usually names the roof plan or marketed footprint, it may or may not include the overhang, blade tips, valance or gutter, and a louvered bay or fabric canopy can be carried by rails inside that outline, so the clear span, post centres, base positions, end projection and height datum have to be requested. The second records that the span and the covering together decide the members: the load hierarchy, the relationships in which bending moment varies with the square of the span while deflection varies with the fourth power, the effect of an overhang on support moment and anchor tension, the separate wind, snow, rain and imposed cases that ASCE 7 and Eurocode 1 require, aluminium's elastic modulus of roughly one third of steel's so that deflection often governs before strength, and the wood and serviceability frameworks supplied by the AWC NDS and Eurocode 5. The third lists the six submittal items to require for a specific span — clear span and supports, member schedule with grade or temper and wood treatment, assumed actions, the deflection limit applied, connection details and base reactions, and the assumed covering and enclosure state — and records that their absence means the span is unverified for that configuration rather than unsafe or adequate. Only already-registered sources were merged (AWC NDS, ASCE 7, Eurocode 1, Eurocode 5/STEP and the Aluminum Design Manual); no new source was added, and no capacity, span, price or approval outcome is published. A source-governance finding is recorded as well: the URL registered for the USDA Wood Handbook returned an HTML landing page for the US Forest Service research station (canonical research.fs.usda.gov/nrs) rather than the PDF on a read-only recheck on 2026-10-10, so it was not folded into today's check group, nothing is attributed to it, and it is listed as the next run's first source-governance priority. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, retail, restaurant, hotel, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-09 · site revision v7.4.0

Do you need planning permission for a pergola? Answering it for one address

The same directly relevant, non-brand, non-place, non-news question intent returned in the next day's sample: in the Google Trends reading, the Great Britain rising query “do you need planning permission for a pergola” moved from +110% over seven days on the previous day to +90% over seven days, and did not appear in the 24-hour or 30-day windows — a single-window, small-sample continuation recorded as a topic signal only. The existing bilingual United Kingdom planning topic was therefore deepened again instead of a near-duplicate page being created. A new section, “Confirming the answer for a specific address”, writes out — from the same registered England sources — that a local planning authority can remove permitted development rights in some or all of its area by issuing an Article 4 Direction, that those rights may already have been removed by a condition on the original or a later planning permission for the house, that a building or enclosure within the curtilage of a listed building is not permitted and needs an application, and that the householder classes carry additional restrictions on what the guidance calls article 2(3) land (National Parks, the Broads, areas of outstanding natural beauty, conservation areas and World Heritage Sites); it then gives a workable order of checks — settle the built form and dimensions, establish what the local authority has recorded for that address, and ask it in writing which class its officers would assess against. The FAQ grew from four to five questions, with the visible FAQ and the FAQPage structured data generated from the same entries, and the page title and summary were widened to the question phrasing so the page matches the query people actually type. Only already-registered sources were used (the Planning Portal FAQ, the GOV.UK householder permitted-development technical guidance, the England Approved Documents collection and the GOV.UK building-regulations approval service page); all four returned HTTP 200 on a read-only recheck on 2026-10-09, no new source was added, no project is determined and no permission outcome is asserted. Trends are normalized sampled signals and prove no demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority; independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-08 · site revision v7.3.0

England planning permission: the structure decides, not the name

Deepened the existing bilingual United Kingdom planning topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after the same-day Google Trends sample showed Great Britain as the most active sampled country and carried a directly relevant, non-noise question inside that activity — the rising query “do you need planning permission for a pergola” (+110% in the 7-day window and +60% at 30 days) alongside “pergola roof” and “pergola with roof”, which held first and second place in the Great Britain top lists in all three windows. The topic was still at content version 1.7.1 (30 July 2026) and listed jurisdiction entry points without writing out the England permitted-development tests the question turns on. Four sections were added: the built form decides the class rather than the word (England's householder rights are written as classes, and a building attached to the house is not permitted under the outbuilding class); the outbuilding tests written out (forward of the principal elevation, single storey, heights of 4 / 2.5 / 3 metres with a 2.5 metre eaves limit, the 50% curtilage coverage test, listed-building curtilage, and the exclusion of verandahs, balconies and raised platforms, with a raised platform defined as higher than 0.3 metres); a raised platform or an attached frame changing the class (attachment falls under the enlargement class with its own rear-projection limits and the same exclusion list); and the point that “no planning permission” is not the end of the checks (building-regulations approval is separate from planning permission, and listed building consent, conservation areas and Article 4 directions, covenants and party-wall matters can also apply). Four FAQ entries and a six-row England pergola permitted-development check were added. Only already-registered sources were merged (the Planning Portal FAQ, the GOV.UK householder permitted-development technical guidance, the England Approved Documents collection and the GOV.UK building-regulations approval service page); no new source was added, no project is determined and no permission outcome is asserted. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, retail, restaurant, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-07 · site revision v7.2.0

Connectors and hardware: an interface is not a capacity

Deepened the existing bilingual fasteners-and-connections topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after the same-day Google Trends sample again showed the overhead-covering family as the most stable cross-country, cross-window, non-noise direction — worldwide “pergola roof” held second place in the top list at 7 and 30 days (59 / 85) with “pergola with roof” at 27 / 51 — together with the hardware and kit sub-intent it carried in Great Britain (24-hour “pergola brackets” rising as Breakout and “pergola kits” +40%; 7-day “oak pergola kits” +250% and “wooden pergola kits” +60%). Two sections were added. The first records that a connector or bracket schedule defines an interface while the governing failure can sit in the connected material — sheet tear-out, net-section rupture, thin-wall crushing, timber end or edge splitting, pull-through, bearing and hole elongation, or a concrete or masonry breakout cone — and that capacity depends on load direction and eccentricity, edge and end distances, hole type and group action, so “it fits” is not “it is acceptable for this member and load direction”. The second records that the fastener family sets the failure mechanism and the hole it needs, and that protection must match the exposure and every metal it touches (a corrosivity-category coating, hot-dip galvanizing or a stainless grade chosen for the environment); dissimilar-metal contact drives galvanic corrosion and should be separated, sealed or kept dry, with crevices and water traps avoided. Only already-registered sources were merged (AWC NDS, the USDA Wood Handbook, Eurocode 5, Eurocode 9, the Aluminum Design Manual, ASTM A123, ASTM A153, the UK Galvanizers Association and the American Galvanizers Association); no new source was added, and no capacity, grade, torque value or approval outcome is published. Three FAQ entries and a six-row connection-and-hardware due-diligence check were added. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, retail, restaurant, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-06 · site revision v7.1.0

Roofing an existing pergola and its connections: the retrofit re-design boundary

Deepened the existing bilingual fixed-roof topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after the overhead-covering family proved to be the strongest cross-country, cross-window, non-noise direction in the same-day Google Trends sample — worldwide “pergola roof” held second place in the top list in all three windows (70 / 61 / 83) and “pergola with roof” stayed in the worldwide top list; Great Britain “pergola roof” was first and “pergola with roof” second in all three windows; the connection sub-intent “pergola roof brackets” was a worldwide 24-hour rising query at +80%; and Great Britain added “pergola with roof and sides” with “covered pergola” at +80%. Two sections were added. The first frames a retrofit as a re-design, not an accessory, requiring the as-built facts to be re-established first — member material, section and grade, actual spans and support spacing, member condition, the connection schedule, post bases, anchors, footings and soil, the fixing substrate, and the existing falls and outlets — before the panel, frame, connections, foundations and local approval are re-checked together. The second records that adding a roof moves the connection question from holding the frame up to holding it down and keeping water out: roof-to-rafter, rafter-to-beam, beam-to-post and post-base connections must resist the added uplift and thermal movement, while a bracket or kit schedule defines only interfaces, geometry and fastener types. Only already-registered sources were used (ASCE 7, Eurocode 1, the ICC IRC, New Zealand MBIE's unroofed-pergola exemption, the AWC NDS, ISO 15686 and HSE fragile-roof guidance); no new source was added, and no capacity, grade, pitch or approval outcome is published. FAQPage grew from four to seven questions and a six-row roof-retrofit readiness check was published. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, retail, restaurant, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-10-05 · site revision v7.0.0

Timber kits and roofing: site and action boundaries for wood pergolas

Deepened the existing bilingual timber topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a wood direction recurred in the same-day Google Trends sample: Czechia 30-day “dřevěná pergola” with 24-hour “drevena pergola” at +450%; Great Britain 24-hour “wooden pergola with roof” +140% and “oak pergola” +110%, seven-day “oak pergola kits” +130% and a 24-hour Breakout for “wooden pergola kits”; and France 24-hour “pergola bois” in second place. Two sections were added. The first separates a kit's cut list from site evidence — grade mark, treatment and use category, supply moisture content, and the support, covering and load assumptions inside a span table, alongside the separate checks for footings, wall attachment, lateral and uplift restraint, drainage and approval. The second records that a solid, glazed, fabric or louvered cover changes the dead load, the wind and snow actions and the reactions at connections and footings, adds water details at the wall, eaves and post bases, and requires the roof and enclosure state to be recorded as part of the design basis. Only already-registered sources were used (AWC NDS, the USDA Wood Handbook, ASCE 7, Eurocode 1, the ICC IRC and EPA moisture-control guidance); no new source was added, and no capacity, grade, dimension or approval outcome is published. FAQPage grew from seven to nine questions. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, retail, restaurant, place and word-game noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-22 · site revision v5.6.0

Motorised-pergola moving parts, machinery classification and power-loss boundaries

Deepened the existing bilingual motors-and-electrical topic, rather than creating a duplicate page, after a global 24-hour Breakout for ‘motorized pergola cost’, a Czech 30-day Breakout for ‘posuvná pergola’, and rising French and Italian bioclimatic-pergola topics. The update classifies each powered element before comparing drive types; bounds the de-facto-new-machinery question to the European Commission's machinery definition and the 20 January 2027 application date while leaving the determination to the responsible economic operator; cites the HSE powered-gates hazard list and its documentation, competent-installation, regular-checking and safe-condition control pattern while keeping that Great Britain gate context non-transferable; treats sensors as control inputs rather than structural wind evidence; draws power, isolation and the water path together; and compares quotes by scope rather than motor brand. No price band is published. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, place, restaurant and unrelated noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-16 · site revision v5.5.0

Pergola-heater type, enclosure, clearance and shutdown boundaries

Deepened the existing bilingual lighting and electrical topic, rather than creating a duplicate page, after a direct short-term global 24-hour +150% signal for ‘pergola heater’. Two official Energy Safe Victoria sources bound outdoor use, stable placement, cylinders and ventilation for portable gas heaters; Health Canada is used only for Canadian consumer precautions for portable electric heaters and outdoor electrical products. The update classifies fixed electric radiant, portable electric and LPG or gas equipment; rechecks outdoor conditions when screens or louvers close; and records support, combustible clearances, fuel, circuits, controls and shutdown rules. The signal did not persist among the leading seven- or 30-day results and is a normalized sampled topic signal—not proof of demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Victorian and Canadian guidance is not transferred into universal clearances, space classification or project approval. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-14 · site revision v5.4.0

Hexagonal-pergola geometry, load path, drainage and French filing boundaries

Added a dedicated bilingual topic after cross-window direct signals for ‘hexagone pergola’: +2000% globally over 24 hours, +1600% globally over 30 days, and Breakout in France over both 24 hours and 30 days. The topic separates nominal regular-hexagon formulae from outside envelope, post axes and usable clear dimensions. The Lysaght gazebo guide is used only as a manufacturer-specific example of perimeter beams, radial rafters, a crown, angled gutters and an outlet in one six-sided kit; the EU JRC Eurocode 1 supports only the actions-category boundary; French Service-Public supports only checking the filing path with the mairie from actual footprint, location, local planning, protected-area status and project type. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, place, news, word-game and low-sample noise was filtered. They do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-13 · site revision v5.3.0

6 × 3 m bioclimatic-pergola size, structure and French filing boundaries

Deepened the existing bilingual louvered-pergola topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after direct cross-signals for global 24-hour ‘pergola bioclimatique 6x3’ (+300%) and the Italian seven-day Pergola Bioclimatica topic (+70%). The update separates outside envelope, post grid, covered area and usable clear size; 18 m² is only nominal rectangle arithmetic, not proof of structural capacity, drainage performance or statutory footprint. French Service-Public material bounds filing routes by local planning, protected areas, new construction and extensions; the EU JRC Eurocode 1 and Aluminum Association sources support only the evidence scope for actions and aluminum design information. Trends are normalized sampled signals; brand, restaurant, place, spelling and low-sample noise was filtered. Trends do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent reviews remain zero.

2026-09-10 · site revision v5.2.0

Photovoltaic-pergola quote scope and French currency boundaries

France showed direct 24-hour signals for ‘pergola avec panneaux solaires’ (Breakout) and ‘pergola photovoltaique’ (+180%), plus +250% over seven days for ‘pergola solaire prix’. The topic now adds a same-scope quote matrix separating structure, PV equipment, approvals and connection, handover and lifecycle, and price basis. CRE supports only the quarterly currency boundary for metropolitan French tariffs, premiums and degressivity; DGCCRF supports multiple-quote and numerical-currency checks only in French energy-renovation consumer context; the US DOE 2025 Q1 benchmark is used only as a component-cost method and its dollar values are not transferred. Trends are normalized sampled signals; most other leading related queries were restaurant, brand, word-game or low-sample noise. Trends do not prove demand, traffic, ranking or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-09 · site revision v5.1.0

Photovoltaic-pergola orientation, interfaces and permit boundaries

Deepened the existing solar-orientation topic after direct seven-day Google Trends signals of +500% for ‘pergola solaire photovoltaïque’ in France and +400% for ‘pergola fotovoltaica permessi’ in Italy. French Service-Public, Italian Italia Semplice and Normattiva, and US DOE FEMP sources separate shade from energy objectives, complete structural-water-electrical interfaces, the French photovoltaic-canopy planning route, the Italian energy-versus-building boundary, and an approval and commissioning evidence packet. Trends are normalized sampled signals—not proof of demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. French, Italian and US scopes are not transferred across jurisdictions. Independent reviews remain zero.

2026-09-08 · site revision v5.0.0

Czech pergola classification, 40 m² boundary and permit path

Added a dedicated bilingual topic after a direct Czech 30-day Breakout for ‘pergola stavební povolení’. The Czech Ministry for Regional Development's May 2026 methodology separates a traditional open garden pergola, roofed shelter, closable louver system and an attached structure that may be an extension. The article makes clear that 40 m² belongs only to specified small-structure routes with cumulative conditions, not a universal permit exemption. Two official gov.cz entries cover project permits and preliminary information, while keeping a non-binding preliminary response distinct from formal permission. Trends select the topic; they do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Classification and procedure must be verified for the parcel, actual construction and current competent-authority requirements. Independent reviews remain zero.

2026-09-07 · site revision v4.9.0

Climbing-rose, grapevine and vegetated-pergola support briefs

Deepened the existing vegetated-pergola topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a French 24-hour Breakout for the Climbing rose topic, a French seven-day +190% rise for ‘pergola végétalisée’, and a Slovak 30-day Breakout for the Grapevines topic. Iowa State Extension explains that climbing roses need training and ties; University of New Hampshire Extension separates grape-arbor shade and fruit objectives and links the training system to support, mature vines, crop, wind and annual pruning. The update adds rose-versus-grape task selection, support-first planning, a shade-versus-fruit boundary and a six-question FAQ. Trends are normalized sampled signals—not proof of demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Cold-climate U.S. horticultural details are not transferred into universal cultivars, dimensions, pruning timing or structural design. Independent reviews remain zero.

2026-09-06 · site revision v4.8.0

Pergola side-panel task, wind and enclosure boundaries

Deepened the existing shade-cover topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after related direct signals for global seven-day ‘pergola side panels’ (+60%), global 24-hour Solar screen (+50%) and UK seven-day ‘retractable pergola shade’ (+100%). Primary U.S. DOE, New Zealand MBIE, EU JRC Eurocode 1 and GOV.UK material separately bound exterior shading, the unroofed-pergola exemption, the wind-action framework and England householder planning pathways. The update adds task classification, operating states, wind load paths, drainage and condensation, measured interfaces, a maintenance matrix and enclosure reassessment. Trends are normalized, sampled and volatile topic signals—not proof of demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority; source scope is not transferred into a product rating, project design or local approval. Independent reviews remain zero.

2026-09-05 · site revision v4.7.0

Arbor, pergola and pagoda terminology boundaries

Deepened the existing bilingual classification topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after the global 24-hour ‘arbor vs pergola’ signal resampled from +350% to Breakout and the UK seven-day ‘pagoda vs pergola’ rose +170%. University of Florida IFAS Extension distinguishes arbor, trellis and pergola by scale, layout and use while noting temporal and regional variation; current RHS guidance identifies a pagoda as an East Asian tower rather than a pergola synonym. Trends select the topic; the 24-hour sample is volatile and proves no demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Horticultural terminology does not replace local legal classification, structural design or approval. Independent reviews remain zero.

2026-09-03 · site revision v4.6.0

Pergola lighting night acceptance, glare and boundary spill

Deepened the existing bilingual lighting topic, rather than creating a duplicate page, after a direct short-term global 24-hour +250% rise for ‘pergola lighting ideas’. U.S. Department of Energy material explains how source intensity, size, number, mounting angle and dark adaptation affect glare; England planning guidance structures a night acceptance check for where, when and how much light shines, boundary spill, ecology and user needs. The signal did not persist in the top five at seven or 30 days and does not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. England planning boundaries and U.S. mechanism guidance do not replace local law, electrical rules or project design. Independent reviews remain zero.

2026-09-02 · site revision v4.5.0

Aluminum-pergola material identity, extrusion and project evidence

Deepened the existing aluminum topic after a Czech 24-hour +70% rise for ‘hliníková pergola’, a Czech seven-day +100% aluminum-louver direction and a Slovak 24-hour +50% Aluminum topic. Aluminum Association 2024 data and the European Commission JRC Eurocode 9 separately bound material designation and tolerance data versus the structural-design framework. The guide now separates material identity, section geometry, connections and welding, product tests, site-specific design, finish, drainage and maintenance. Trends select the topic; they do not prove absolute demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Standard scope and national adoption are not transferred, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-09-01 · site revision v4.4.0

Terrace-pergola support, drainage and regional approval boundaries

Rewrote the existing attached-versus-freestanding topic after global 30-day rises for ‘pergola na terasu’ (+70%) and ‘pergola terraza’ (+50%), corroborated by Slovak seven- and 30-day top queries. Added official GOV.UK England householder guidance and used existing structural-actions, New Zealand unroofed-pergola and current Slovak legal sources to separate ground patios, raised terraces, balconies and roof terraces before verifying supporting structure, anchor path, waterproofing, drainage, thresholds, guards and local procedure. Trends select the topic; they do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Regional thresholds are not transferred, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-31 · site revision v4.3.0

Enclosed-pergola and French veranda approval boundary

Deepened the existing terminology and classification topic, rather than creating a near-duplicate page, after a short-term global 24-hour +130% rise for ‘pergola fermée’. Official French Service-Public pergola and veranda guidance separately bounds the footprint/local-planning route for open structures and the floor-area implications of an enclosed addition. The new section requires the mairie to reassess the actual changes in screens, doors, walls, glazing, connection, use, facade, footprint and floor area. The 24-hour signal has no seven- or 30-day persistence and does not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. French thresholds are not transferred, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-30 · site revision v4.2.0

Pergola bracket-kit and DIY roof-kit verification

Deepened the existing roofed-pergola topic after a global 24-hour rise for ‘pergola bracket kits’, the same UK seven-day signal and UK 30-day roofed/DIY-kit signals. Added official New Zealand MBIE CodeMark guidance and retained the 2024 IRC foundation load-transfer boundary: match the exact connector, member, fastener, certificate scope and installation instruction, then separately verify site actions, spans, walls, anchorage, soil, footings, drainage, temporary stability and local approval. Brand, place and unrelated noise were filtered. Trends select the topic; they do not prove visits, indexing, ranking, traffic or authority. Independent reviews remain zero.

2026-08-28 · site revision v4.1.0

Pergola contractor quote and payment evidence checks

Updated the existing bilingual verification topic after global 24-hour and seven-day contractor-query signals. Added same-scope quotes, unresolved allowances, California deposit boundaries, payment milestones and written change records using NSW quotation guidance and the rechecked CSLB homeowner checklist. Local rules are not transferable. Trends select the topic, not evidence of visits, indexing or ranking; independent reviews remain zero.

2026-08-27 · site revision v4.0.0

Bioclimatic and aluminum louvered pergola evidence boundaries

Deepened the existing louvered topic, rather than creating near-duplicate country pages, after direct cross-country Google Trends signals in the global, Czech, French and Slovak results. EU Regulation 2019/1188, the Czech Ministry for Regional Development 2026 method and French ADEME guidance separately bound pergola-awning wind classes, Czech classification by actual roof and attachment, and exterior shading as a heat-adaptation measure. None transfers into a universal wind, waterproofing, cooling or approval class for a rigid louver assembly. Trends select the topic; they do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking or authority. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-26 · site revision v3.9.0

Czech 2026 pergola-versus-shelter methodology update

Replaced the older small-structure reference with the Czech Ministry for Regional Development methodology updated 6 May 2026 and revised the carport comparison. The current boundary says the law itself defines neither term, modern roofing and integrated technologies can make sales labels misleading, and actual construction characteristics, purpose and functional properties should govern assessment. An Italian 24-hour Breakout for ‘tettoia per auto’ only reconfirmed the existing topic; it does not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking or a local approval outcome. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-25 · site revision v3.8.0

Pergola-versus-carport function, roof and regulatory boundaries

Deepened the existing terminology comparison, rather than creating near-duplicate country pages, after a Czech 30-day Breakout for ‘přístřešek na auto’ and a Slovak seven-day +90% rise for ‘pergola na auto’. New official New Zealand MBIE, Czech Ministry for Regional Development and current Slovak legal sources, together with existing French planning guidance, separate pergolas, carports and other shelters by actual roof, vehicle use, enclosure, attachment, drainage and site facts. Trends select the topic—they do not prove demand, visits, indexing, ranking or a local approval outcome; independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-23 · site revision v3.7.0

Roofed, lean-to and transparent pergola system boundaries

Rewrote the fixed-roof topic as a task-first guide after global 24-hour Google Trends queries for ‘pergola med tag’, ‘lean to pergola with roof’ and ‘slanted pergola’, a French seven-day transparent-cover query, and Norwegian 24-hour and 30-day roof queries. Primary Norwegian TEK17, 2024 US IRC, Great Britain HSE and New Zealand guidance define the boundaries. There is no universal pitch or best transparent material, and a bracket kit is not a structural calculation. Trends are topic signals—not proof of volume, visits, indexing, ranking or authority; independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-22 · site revision v3.6.0

Pergola lighting ideas, glare control and electrical boundaries

Deepened the lighting topic after a global 30-day Google Trends rise for ‘pergola lighting ideas’ and a Slovakia lighting-topic anomaly, verified against primary NPS, DarkSky, WorkSafe New Zealand and CPSC guidance. The update starts with the activity, separates circulation, task, ambient and accent layers, and adds shielding, spill, controls, outdoor ratings, temporary versus fixed wiring, commissioning and maintenance boundaries. Trends are topic signals—not proof of search volume, traffic or ranking; jurisdictional electrical requirements are not transferred, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-20 · site revision v3.5.0

Canisse shade-mat installation, attachment and safety boundaries

Deepened the removable shade-cover topic in response to a dated direct Google Trends query signal and French government site-study, wildfire-protection and planning sources. The article answers installation direction first, then separates placement over transparent roofing from direct frame attachment, shade from rain protection, weathering and replacement, wind-related removal, ignition-source separation and local planning checks. Site observations are not transferred into universal service-life, wind or fire ratings, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-19 · site revision v3.4.0

Vegetated-pergola shade, planting and structural boundaries

Deepened the vegetated-pergola topic in response to a dated direct Google Trends query signal, official French ADEME, Cerema, OFB and Paris guidance, and two direct pergola studies. The update separates an open plant canopy from a green roof and moving louvered roof, and adds local plant origin, climbing method, irrigation and root-zone, wet-weight and wind, moving-part exclusion and stop-use boundaries. Study results are not transferred into universal cooling or load ratings, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-17 · site revision v3.3.0

Pergola-builder identity, credentials and contract verification

Deepened the procurement-verification topic in response to a dated short-term trend signal and official California CSLB, NSW Government and French Service-Public guidance. Nearby results and reviews are treated only as discovery signals; the update adds contracting-entity, licence-class, insurance-scope, like-for-like quote, permit/design responsibility, written-change and stop-before-signing checks. Jurisdiction rules are not transferred across borders, and independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-07 · site revision v3.2.0

Freeze-thaw drainage and roof ice-dam applicability boundary

Added Michigan state-government and University of Alaska Fairbanks extension sources to separate the classic attic-roof ice-dam mechanism from frozen blockage inside concealed pergola drainage. A frozen outlet, ice ridge, new ponding, concealed overflow, displaced part or electrical wetting is a stop-use and escalation signal; no product winter rating, de-icing method or reopening approval is provided. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-06 · site revision v3.1.0

Post-snow meltwater reopening boundary and revision-history integrity

Added Government of Canada household flood-prevention evidence to connect post-snow meltwater, eavestroughs, downspouts, discharge points and site grading with reopening checks; household maintenance depths are not pergola capacity or reopening thresholds. Fixed missing recent release entries in revision history and added local and live audit contracts. Independent external reviews remain zero.

2026-08-05 · site revision v3.0.0

Snow-load operational safety and removal boundaries

Added official FEMA, OSHA and NRC Canada sources to show that snow depth is not a universal action threshold, warning signs trigger stop-use and escalation, and snow removal is a separately planned high-risk operation; no pergola capacity, remaining-capacity or removal authorization is claimed.

2026-08-04 · site revision v2.9.0

Heat-risk metrics and pergola field-measurement boundaries

Added official OSHA and NWS sources to distinguish the uses, inputs and limits of weather-station air temperature, Heat Index and on-site WBGT; WBGT is not presented as a universal comfort score, residential closure rule or product cooling rating.

2026-08-03 · site revision v2.8.0

Eight-jurisdiction Australia NCC 2025 adoption matrix

Added seven official state and territory sources plus an eight-jurisdiction bilingual JSON/CSV register; it separates adopted, delayed, transitional, split building/plumbing and retained-NCC-2022 states without determining the edition for a project.

2026-08-02 · site revision v2.7.0

NCC and rainfall-data transition update

Clarified jurisdiction-specific NCC 2025 adoption and kept NOAA Atlas 15 preliminary data separate from final design values; Search Console was not resubmitted.

2026-07-30 · site revision v2.6.0

History, thermal-comfort and EU pergola-awning evidence expansion

Added and selectively checked 16 institutional, regulatory, standards-catalog and peer-reviewed research sources; rewrote the history and thermal-comfort topics, added an EU pergola-awning wind-class topic, and published three JSON/CSV evidence registers with transfer limits. The EU article separates the 2019/1188 class table, EN 13561 product scope, Machinery Directive harmonised edition, CPR-list edition and new-CPR transition; the Canada entry now points to NBC 2025 and an official provincial/territorial authority directory without inferring local adoption. New sections use section-mapped citations. No independent external review is recorded, and product classes, a DoP or CE marking are not presented as complete-project approval.

2026-07-29 · site revision v2.5.6

Test-report and product-certificate verification

Added four conformity-document roles, six official reference entry points, a twelve-step scope and configuration checklist, eight red flags, version 1.0 JSON, a document-class CSV and a blank verification template; it also separates document authenticity, scope match and responsible-party project acceptance. The framework validates no specific product, report or certificate and is not anti-counterfeit verification, certification, a technical submittal, permit decision or independent external review.

2026-07-29 · site revision v2.5.5

Product-evidence pathways and ten-stage project dossier

Added official product-evidence entry points for the United States, European Union, England, Australia, Canada and New Zealand with explicit evidence uses and project boundaries; published a ten-stage project dossier, seven controlled document statuses, five scope-matching checks, version 1.0 JSON/CSV and a blank dossier template. The framework does not rate a product, assign legal duties or constitute a technical submittal, permit decision or independent external review.

2026-07-29 · site revision v2.5.4

International standards navigation and edition maintenance

Expanded the bilingual standards map into current official entry points, edition or transition notes, local-adoption boundaries and a seven-question evidence matrix for six jurisdictions; added version 1.0 JSON/CSV downloads and Dataset markup, and distinguished the targeted edition check from a full re-review of all 40 sources. This update does not change evidence-content version 1.7 or establish a code-adoption database, project conclusion or independent external review.

2026-07-29 · site revision v2.5.3

Core definition, site identity and trust entry points

Reworked the bilingual homepage and “What is a pergola?” entry point with an actual-construction classification matrix, related-term boundaries and project-verification steps; added the crawlable 512×512 site icon to Organization markup and DefinedTerm markup to the definition pages. This update does not change the technical evidence-content version or represent completed independent external review.

2026-07-28 · site revision v2.5.2

Jurisdiction pathways and crawlable topic relationships

Added a visible six-jurisdiction approval-verification matrix to the planning hub and crawlable cross-jurisdiction links to every planning-and-codes article. The change responds to early Search Console interest in planning and jurisdiction queries while preserving the boundary that national guidance is not a local permit decision.

2026-07-28 · structured-data revision v2.5.1

Google Dataset eligibility correction

Expanded short Chinese Dataset descriptions to the documented 50-character minimum and supplied named, linked DataCatalog references. The site continues to disclose that no separate open-data licence is asserted instead of inventing one to silence a recommended-field warning.

2026-07-28 · v2.5

Question-first evidence decisions and accurate discovery metadata

Added a bilingual evidence decision guide and a topic-specific project-verification matrix to every article; separated the 25 July editorial review date from the 28 July material page modification date; added article images to the XML sitemap; removed retired sitelinks-search-box markup; and retained the evidence-content version, source review date and zero independent-review status without false freshness or recognition claims.

2026-07-25 · v2.4

Transparent authorship, AI-assisted content provenance and expert-review packs

Added a visible Who/How/Why disclosure to every topic, published topic-level JSON and W3C PROV JSON-LD records for institutional authorship and AI-assisted workflow, preserved the absence of named licensed authors and independent external reviewers, and created a 44-topic pre-review bundle with stable claims, registered sources, suggested expertise and common review questions. These materials improve auditability and external-review readiness without claiming that outreach, endorsement or review has occurred.

2026-07-25 · v2.3

Browser security, privacy transparency and recognizable site identity

Externalized executable search data to support a strict same-origin Content Security Policy; added HSTS, anti-framing, permission, opener and content-type protections; published a bilingual machine-verifiable security/privacy posture with explicit hosting and independent-audit limits; corrected HTML semantics found by a full-site validator; and introduced a high-contrast pergola-and-open-book icon across SVG favicon, PNG, Apple touch and web-app manifest formats.

2026-07-25 · v2.2

WCAG evaluation coverage and sitewide automated accessibility audit

Published a bilingual 55-criterion WCAG 2.2 A/AA self-assessment coverage matrix, a dated axe-core scan of every generated HTML page, machine-readable JSON/CSV evidence and accessibility metadata on every page. Coverage states distinguish automation, representative manual evidence and current non-applicability; no formal conformance claim, third-party certification, assistive-technology guarantee or disabled-user task result is asserted.

2026-07-25 · v2.1

Source lifecycle, retrieval and review governance

Published 40 source-governance records with evidence role, geographic scope, lifecycle class, review interval, next-review date and a dated retrieval snapshot. Thirty-five registered URLs were reachable by automated clients and five required manual follow-up because access was restricted; HTTP status is not treated as content validation, edition currency or local adoption. Immutable v2.0 catalog and quality snapshots remain available, and no external recognition is implied.

2026-07-25 · v2.0

Public quality metrics, source-coverage floor and clearer link behavior

Added five official or standards-body sources and scoped article guidance, raising every one of the 44 topics to at least two associated sources; published a bilingual quality dashboard and machine-readable metrics; announced every new-tab link to screen readers; upgraded the review schema for evidence-content v1.7 while preserving the immutable v1.6, v1.8 and v1.9 artifacts. External reviews, field observations, material corrections and accessibility certification remain explicitly zero or not recorded.

2026-07-25 · v1.9

Release integrity, provenance and correction governance

Published a machine-readable release identity, SHA-256 manifest for public machine artifacts, bilingual release-integrity pages, a correction-report schema and blank template, and a zero-record public correction log. Evidence content remains v1.6 and the independent-review ledger remains zero; no certification, DOI or external endorsement is claimed.

2026-07-25 · v1.8

Machine discovery, citation and external-review readiness

Published curated llms.txt guidance without presenting it as a search standard, Atom feeds, OpenSearch metadata, site-level CFF/BibTeX/RIS/CSL JSON citation files, per-article BibTeX and CSL JSON exports, and a schema-validated local reviewer workbench. The public ledger still records zero independent external reviews.

2026-07-24 · v1.7

Accessibility follow-up and assistive-technology clarity

Added unique accessible names to versioned research downloads, keyboard-focusable table regions with explicit header scope, named article support navigation, forced-color mode styling and a privacy-preserving local barrier-report builder; retained the v1.6 evidence datasets and did not claim third-party WCAG certification.

2026-07-24 · v1.6

Claim-level citation and annotation infrastructure

Published 132 bilingual stable claim records for the three key takeaways in all 44 topics, with article-fragment targets, article-level associated sources, explicit validation limits, downloadable JSON/CSV and W3C Web Annotation JSON-LD; retained v1.5 data snapshots without claiming independent external review.

2026-07-24 · v1.5

Research agenda and field-observation protocol

Published eight prioritized evidence gaps, a 30-field bilingual data dictionary, a blank observation CSV and a safety/privacy protocol; added Dataset metadata while explicitly publishing zero field-observation results and preserving v1.3 and v1.4 data snapshots.

2026-07-24 · v1.4

Independent-review infrastructure and wildfire topic

Added a bilingual independent-review protocol, a public status ledger for 44 topics, downloadable JSON/CSV and a review-record template; every article now distinguishes internal editorial review from independent external review not yet recorded, without a fabricated reviewedBy field; added a wildfire-ember topic and two official fire-service sources while retaining the v1.3 data snapshots.

2026-07-24 · v1.3

Evidence data and global coverage

Published versioned source-register, topic-to-source and bilingual glossary datasets with Dataset markup; added New Zealand approval-path and heat-comfort topics; expanded articles with machine-readable bibliographic metadata, structured citation objects, source tiers and stable source-register anchors.

2026-07-24 · v1.2

Original diagrams and practical tools

Added six citable original technical diagrams, article and social image metadata, a bilingual history topic, and three interactive tools for classification, product evidence and installation handover; added primary images to Article markup and updated the version.

2026-07-24 · v1.1

Authority and transparency release

Added editorial-team, disclosure and revision pages; added original verification matrices and technical synthesis to ten cornerstone topics; expanded Article markup with author URL, citations, section, word count and version; qualified the sitewide Oscar link with sponsored and nofollow.

2026-07-24 · v1.0

Initial public release

Published the bilingual topic library, glossary, source register, international standards map, search, canonical links, hreflang, structured data, robots and sitemap.

Correction policy

An error that changes a principal conclusion, scope or safety boundary is corrected in the article and logged here. Spelling, formatting and meaning-preserving edits are not itemized. When a source link fails, the team first seeks a replacement from the same issuing organization rather than a low-quality repost.