There's a very interesting short story about the experimental works of a fictional author, An Examination of the Work of Herbert Quain, that really reminded me of R07, and wanted to share it. It's by Borges.

Quain, recently deceased and mostly unsuccessful, first writes a mystery novel: The God of the Labyrinth, an otherwise regular inquiry into an assassination, save for a sentence at the end:
>‘Everyone thought that the encounter of the two chess players was accidental.’ This phrase allows one to understand that the solution is erroneous. The unquiet reader re-reads the pertinent chapters and discovers another solution, the true one. The reader of this singular book is thus forcibly more discerning than the detective.
Supremely relevant to Umineko, the reader figuring it out while the detective fails to do so. But even more relevant is his next work, April March.

April March (the book itself) is composed like a game:
>In judging this novel, no one would fail to discover that it is a game; it is only fair to remember that the author never considered it anything else. ‘I lay claim in this novel,’ I have heard him say, ‘to the essential features of all games: symmetry, arbitrary rules, tedium.’
It's made up of thirteen chapters, in a structure arranged as shown in this diagram:
https://files.catbox.moe/bbs382.png
This one's a doozy. The important part is that there's a fundamental chapter, Z, that is shared among all the stories told inside the book. It's comparable to the intial state of the gameboard or the outcome of Rokkenjima. Then, Y1, Y2, and Y3 are separate possible scenarios that branch out from there, and each of them branch once more into three more, X from 1 to 9. That's what the brackets represent. So what you have is one book that contains within it nine different stories that share major unavoidable plot elements and are alternate universes of each other, much like what happens with fragments. Furthermore,
>Whoever reads the sections in chronological order (for instance: X3, Y1, Z) will lose the peculiar savour of this strange book. Two narratives —X7, X8— lack individual worth; mere juxtaposition lends them effectiveness...
>I do not know if I should mention that once April March was published, Quain regretted the ternary order and predicted that whoever would imitate him would choose a binary arrangement:
Which is what we see in the pairings of question and answer arcs. Despite Quain's text having a "rage for symmetry" as Borges writes that Schopenhauer wrote about Kant, it seems from the gloss that it is not as internally unified as Higurashi and Umineko are (and they already go to many places).

It really stood out to me, it's like seeing someone make a site for the library of Alexandria that really has an infinity of incoherent text just as he described it, except seemingly by pure coincidence. Then there's Death and the Compass making fun of detective novels in general, where a man spends three months reading up on Hebrew theology to unravel a murder, only to get totally baited. Maybe that's another place Umineko telepathically got material from.