Four cells on the launcher - Work packages, Release ready, On hold, Overdue -
every number from /api/wps/metrics, which T4.1 built. There is deliberately no
cache fallback anywhere in renderPipeline(): a remembered number sitting beside
three live ones is the failure B4 exists to remove, wearing a different hat.
The cells are the four the endpoint already computes and the dashboard already
filters on, so they map 1:1 onto its flags rather than inventing a fifth slice
nothing downstream understands. wp-creation-app.js now names them (DASH_FLAGS)
for the same reason: a cell linking to a filter the board does not recognise is
a dead link that still looks live.
"Links to a filtered view via a shareable URL" needed the filter to BE URL state,
which it was not - the dashboard kept its flag in a variable. So:
- dashToggleFlag pushes ?flag=<f>, and clears it on the way out of the board
- the creator applies ?flag= before its first render, not after (applying it
after paints the whole board and throws it away)
- Back and Forward move through filters like any other state
- work-package-suite-app.js forwards the flag ACROSS the iframe boundary, since
the creator's src carries only the project. B7/T7.1 dissolves that frame and
this hand-off goes with it; it is commented as such.
Zero is a real answer for one slice of a project that has work in it. Four zeros
on a project with none is not a reading, it is a strip that looks broken - that
case gets a sentence and a way into the creator instead. A failed request gets an
explicit error naming the failure, and no cells at all.
html/index.html the strip, its states, PIPE_CELLS
html/wp-creation-app.js flag as URL state; DASH_FLAGS; dashApplyFlag
html/work-package-suite-app.js forward the flag into the frame; clear on exit
tests/pipeline_check.py new - 43 checks
Done when
[x] every number comes from a server endpoint - proved by poisoning localStorage
with 99 fake packages and demanding the strip still read the server's 4
[x] each cell links to a filtered view via a shareable URL - and the probe
FOLLOWS the link and reads the filter inside the frame rather than trusting
that a correct-looking URL was built
[x] a project with zero work packages renders a sensible empty state
[x] the strip announces updates via aria-live (polite - a count is not an
interruption) and reports aria-busy while it is counting
What the probe caught
The link landed on "Complete the SOP Configuration first". Not the strip's
fault: browser_check.py's fixture stores a bare {governance: …} blob as the SOP
data, where production stores {sop, state}. restoreSavedSOP() needs `state` and
bails without it, so sopComplete stays false and the WP tab shows its gate.
pipeline_check seeds the production shape. The underlying wart is real and is
logged rather than fixed - see BL-018.
Verified one at a time
pipeline_check 43/43 new
launcher_check 58/58
stepper_check 70/70
url_state 23/23 the dashboard's new flag state did not disturb it
aggregates 16/16
browser_check 71/71
a11y 22/22
autosave 34/34
f_items F1-F5 FIXED, F6 REPRODUCES (T7.2)
No colour literal added: still 0 across all page sheets and inline blocks. The
four cells are told apart by a label, a sentence and an accent - three channels,
so colour is not carrying it alone (C1).
Raised, not fixed
BL-018 The WP tab's gate is the last localStorage-derived status in the app.
T4.1 moved the launcher's card to the server; the wizard page still
decides gate-or-creator from wp_suite_sop_complete plus a state blob.
pullProject refreshes both on load so a connected user is fine, but the
two answers come from different places and the fallback is silent.
Includes a second, sharper edge: project-data.js:210 writes that flag
for ANY row returned, including one with no `state` to restore - so the
flag is written and never read consistently. T7.1 owns it.
Question for the PR, per CLAUDE.md: the strip counts Overdue against `data.due`,
which is free text today. CR-004/CR-018 restructure location but not dates. If
"overdue" is going to drive anything beyond a launcher tile, that field needs a
type.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
21 KiB
21 KiB
Backlog
Anything noticed during implementation that is real but not in the plan goes here instead of
into the current PR. CLAUDE.md requires this: every change traces to an item ID, so
unplanned work gets logged rather than built.
Add an entry, do not fix it inline. This file is reviewed at T9.7 and feeds the next spec
revision.
Format
### BL-001 — Short title
- **Found during:** T3.2
- **Where:** path/to/file.js:120
- **What:** one or two sentences on the problem
- **Why not now:** out of scope for the current wave / needs a product decision / larger than the task
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** wave 9 / next revision / needs Nick
Known follow-ups already identified in the spec
These are logged from the source documents, not discovered in code. They are real but deliberately deferred.
BL-000a — Validated P6 activity lookup
- From:
CR-001 - What:
CR-001accepts free text for the P6 Activity ID. A validated lookup against an imported P6 activity list was identified as the eventual want. - Why not now: the Micron schedule is actively being reworked, so importing an activity list now would import churn.
- Suggested: next revision, once the schedule stabilizes.
BL-000b — Field-level toggles in General Information
- From:
CR-006 - What:
CR-006toggles whole sections. General Information may need per-field toggles, since projects differ in which identifiers they use. - Why not now: section-level toggles cover every removal request currently on the list.
- Suggested: next revision, if a second project needs a different field set.
BL-000c — Estimated versus actual hours productivity factor
- From:
CR-017 - What: Actual Hours is retained and rolls up. Comparing it against estimated hours would produce a productivity factor, which was the stated reason for wanting the field.
- Why not now: estimated hours capture is not in scope this round.
- Suggested: next revision.
BL-000d — Attachment merge versus list on export
- From:
CR-008/T9.1 - What: whether the PDF export merges attachments into one package or lists them separately.
- Why not now: product decision, raised in the
T9.1PR. - Suggested: needs Nick.
Found during implementation
BL-001 — The creator overflows horizontally at 1440px
- Found during: T0.2
- Where:
html/wp-creation-index.html/html/wp-creation-styles.css - What: the creator lays out 1,551px of content inside a 1,440px viewport, so the page
scrolls sideways at desk width. Measured by
tests/baseline_shots.py, which comparesdocumentElement.scrollWidthagainstclientWidthat each capture.F2covers narrow widths; no item covers this one. The other three overflowing pages (launcher 425px, SOP wizard 429px, field view 432px, all at a 390px viewport) areF2and are already scheduled. - Why not now: wave 1 is scoped to
F1–F5, andT7.1dissolves this page's iframe and rebuilds its layout regardless — fixing it in wave 1 would be thrown away. - Suggested wave or follow-up: verify it is gone at
T7.1; if it survives the rebuild, it needs its own item in the next revision. - Root cause, found at T1.4 — not fixed, T7.1 owns it.
wp-creation-styles.css:815has@media (max-width: 860px) { body { --nav-w: 56px; } }, which is correct. Butwp-creation-app.js:1389injectsbody{--nav-w:288px;}into a runtime<style>with no media query. Injected last, same specificity, so it wins over the media query and--nav-wstays 288px at every width. Everything keyed off it then reserves 288px of rail that is not there:.mainpadding-leftcalc(288px + 28px)(wp-creation-styles.css:109),.ctx-bar(:452),.release-banner(:488),.section-nav-bar(:596) and.sticky-save { left: var(--nav-w,288px) }(:820). At a 390px screen that forces the initial containing block to 485px. The fix is to give the injected rule the same breakpoint, or to stop injecting the value that the stylesheet already declares — one line, but it belongs with the creator rebuild rather than in a wave 1 rendering task. - Consequence for
F4: everyposition: fixed; right: 0element on this page sits at the right edge of that 485px box, which is 95px off the visible 390px screen. The comments drawer is placed correctly relative to its containing block; the containing block is wrong.T1.4reports this as an attributed note rather than a drawer defect, so nobody is sent to the wrong file. - Update, T1.2: the 1440px half of this is resolved as a side effect, not by intent.
The unbreakable
#wp-usermenurun thatT1.2fixed was the cause of four of the five overflows recorded in wave 0 — launcher, SOP wizard and field view at 390px, and the creator at 1440px. Capture now reports overflow on 1 of 14 shots instead of 5. What remains is the creator at 390px (485px of content), which is its own layout rather than the shared chrome. Left open soT7.1still checks it.
BL-002 — outline: none appears three times in the wizard sheet, not once
- Found during: T0.1
- Where:
html/work-package-suite-styles.css:325,:347,:501 - What:
A3/F5cite the focus-ring removal at322-328only. The sameoutline:none+ pale 3px glow is repeated at:347(.user-pick:focus), and:501(.seq-step input.seq-label:focus) removes the outline with no replacement at all, which is a straight CLAUDE.md violation. - Why not now: it is in scope for
T3.4, not a separate item — recorded so the task fixes all three rather than the one the review cited. - Suggested wave or follow-up: fold into
T3.4.
BL-003 — User-menu links are 16px tap targets
- Found during: T1.2
- Where:
html/auth-guard.js:186-191(buildUserMenu'slink()) - What: every link in the app bar's user menu — including
Sign out— renders 16px tall, fromfont:400 13px/1.2.T1.2made them all reachable at 390px, but reachable is not the same as comfortably tappable on the gloved-hands surface. Well under the usual 24–44px guidance. - Why not now:
T1.2is explicitly triage andT2.2replaces this markup with the drawer, which has its own tap targets. Enlarging them here would change the 1440px layout the task must leave byte-identical, and would be thrown away in wave 2. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T2.2should ship the drawer with adequate targets;C1's audit atT9.5confirms it app-wide.
BL-004 — help.js ships a 52-colour palette in a different design language
- Found during: T3.1
- Where:
html/help.js:79(the injected<style>) - What: the help centre injects its own stylesheet with 52 colour literals and zero
var(). It is not a fourth copy of the suite palette — it is a different one: slate (#27313f,#334155,#e2e8f0), violet (#7c3aed,#f3e8ff), its own blue (rgba(37,99,214,.15), see BL-008) and its own greys (#fafbfc,#eef1f6,#f4f6f9,#f7f8fa). It loads on the launcher, SOP wizard, creator and field view. - Why not now:
T3.2's contract is "no rendered change", and converting this palette is a restyle, not a consolidation — it would change the help centre on four pages and break the empty-screenshot-diff done-when. The token rule inCLAUDE.mddoes reach it, so it is real work, not a non-issue. - Suggested wave or follow-up: wave 9, alongside
C4. Documented indocs/reference/tokens.md§1.
BL-005 — Two modals are styled entirely by inline style= attributes
- Found during: T3.1
- Where:
html/auth-guard.js:67-92(change-password) andhtml/wp-format.js:120-150(preferences) - What: 35 raw colour literals between them —
#0f62fe,#8d8d8d,#e0e0e0,#defbe6,#fff1f1,#0e6027,rgba(20,30,50,.5)and so on — written intostyle=strings, so no stylesheet can reach them and no token can either. - Why not now: they are markup built by JS, not a stylesheet, so they are outside
T3.2's four-sheet surface. Both dialogs are rebuilt as accessible components underC1. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T9.5, with theC1audit.
BL-006 — Seventeen half-pixel font sizes
- Found during: T3.1
- Where:
html/wp-creation-styles.css(14) andhtml/wp-chrome.css(3) - What:
9.5px,10.5px,11.5px,12.5px,13.5pxsit inside an otherwise integer type scale of 27 distinct sizes. They round inconsistently between engines and there is no reason for any of them. - Why not now: retiring them moves text on every creator screen;
T3.2forbids rendered change andT7.1re-lays-out this page anyway. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T7.1. Seedocs/reference/tokens.md§6a.
BL-007 — --radius: 0 is contradicted 45 times in the sheet that declares it
- Found during: T3.1
- Where:
html/wp-creation-styles.css:26and 45 rawborder-radiusvalues in the same file - What: the creator declares
--radius: 0and honours it 23 times, then writes2px 3px 4px 5px 6px 8px 9px 10px 12px 14px 20px 50%directly in 45 other places, plus two asymmetric CTA radii at:707and:716. Square corners are the Carbon idiom and the intent everywhere else in the suite; this one sheet drifted. - Why not now: changing 45 radii is the most visible diff available, and
T3.2must produce none. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T7.1. Seedocs/reference/tokens.md§6c.
BL-008 — There is a second brand blue: #2563d6
- Found during: T3.1
- Where:
html/wp-creation-styles.css:565,html/help.js,html/wp-creation-app.js:1257 - What:
.sop-inherited— the highlight on every field a work package inherited from its SOP — fills withrgba(37,99,214,0.07), which is#2563d6, not the suite's#0f62fe.help.jscarries the same blue at.15alpha and the print window uses it solid for headings. At 7% nobody has noticed, but "one accent colour" is not currently true even after the four token systems collapse to one. - Why not now: swapping it changes a rendered fill, which
T3.2forbids. It is the same conversation as the green action buttons. - Suggested wave or follow-up: wave 9, with
C4.T3.5is scoped to buttons; this is a field fill. Seedocs/reference/tokens.md§8-E.
BL-009 — A ninth amber, four points from the eighth
- Found during: T3.2
- Where:
html/field.html:35(.pill.warn) - What: the field view's warn pill uses
#8a6d00; every other warning text in the app is#8e6a00. Four points apart, doing the same job, on the surface that is read through a face shield. Almost certainly a typo rather than a decision —field.html's inline<style>was missed by theT3.1inventory, which is why it survived this long. - Why not now: merging it moves a rendered colour, which
T3.2forbids.T3.2named it--wp-status-warning-text-altso it is visible rather than hidden in a hex. - Suggested wave or follow-up: wave 9, with
C4.T3.5is scoped to buttons; this is a status pill. Seedocs/reference/tokens.md§8-K.
BL-010 — 829 raw spacing, type and radius values remain inside rules
- Found during: T3.2
- Where: all five page stylesheets; 492 of them in
html/wp-creation-styles.css - What:
T3.2removed every raw colour from the page sheets, but 483 spacing values, 281 font-sizes and 65 radii are still written literally in rules. The token declarations are aliased —--s1…--s6,--ctl,--radius,--mono,--sansall resolve fromtheme-light.css— but the rules that should consume them do not. - Why not now: not effort — arithmetic. The creator's spacing is every integer from 1px to
14px, which is a histogram rather than a scale, so there is no token
padding: 9px 11pxmaps to without changing one of the two numbers.T3.2forbids changing a rendered value, so tokenising these and honouring that constraint are mutually exclusive. This is the oneT3.2done-when not met, and it is recorded as not met rather than quietly skipped. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T5.xandT7.1, where these pages are re-laid-out and the values are being chosen again anyway. Seedocs/reference/tokens.md§6b and §11.
BL-011 — Three JS-injected overlays race to append on the SOP page
- Found during: T3.2
- Where:
html/work-package-suite.html—#wp-sync-badge,.wp-navscrim,#wp-sidenav - What: the sync badge, the drawer scrim and the drawer are appended to
<body>by three different scripts after async work, so their DOM order varies run to run. Nothing is painted differently — all three areposition: fixedwith their ownz-index— but any test that keys elements by sibling index sees dozens of phantom differences on this page. It cost real time inT3.2before the cause was found, andtests/token_check.pynow keys by identity to avoid it. - Why not now: invisible to users, and the fix is ordering in three separate scripts, which
is a change with no observable benefit while
T7.1is still going to move this code. - Suggested wave or follow-up: wave 9, if it is still true after
T7.1.
BL-012 — admin.html and the creator at 1440px are not stable enough to screenshot-diff
- Found during: T3.2
- Where:
tests/baseline_shots.pyoutput foradmin-390,admin-1440,creator-1440 - What: the task brief's trap 2 says
admin.htmlandusers.htmlare not byte-stable. Measured by capturing wave 2 against itself:usersis stable at both widths, and the unstable third is the creator at 1440px (344,272 px differ, bbox 288,14→1439,4924).adminis worse than "live timestamps" suggests — its captured page height varies by about 600px between runs, so the two images cannot even be compared pixel-for-pixel. - Why not now: the screenshots are a review aid, not a gate;
tests/token_check.pynow covers what the diff was being asked to prove, and covers it better. - Suggested wave or follow-up: wave 9, alongside
C2. Either freeze the clock in the fixture or exclude the live regions from capture — otherwise every later wave re-learns this.
BL-013 — The creator's inputs have no visible focus ring at all
- Found during: T3.4
- Where:
html/wp-creation-styles.css:168(outline: noneon every input, textarea and select) and:171(:focusreplaces it withbox-shadow: 0 0 0 3px var(--accent-dim)) - What: the same defect
BL-002recorded in the wizard sheet, in the sheet next door. Measured in the browser with focus emulation on: a focused creator input reportsoutline-style: none, and its only focus cue is a 3px#edf5ffglow against a#fffffffield — a 1.05:1 edge..wp-nav-search:focus(:765) is the same. That isCLAUDE.md's "outline: none without a replacement of at least equal visibility", on the page with the most form controls in the app. - Why not now:
T3.4's files are the SOP wizard stylesheet, andBL-002scoped the three sites it folded in to that sheet. The creator is rebuilt atT7.1/T7.2. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T7.2, orT9.5with theC1audit if it survives the rebuild. The fix is the ringT3.4established:outline: 2px solid var(--cds-focus); outline-offset: -2px, whichconsole.css,wp-chrome.cssand now the wizard all use.
BL-015 — The creator's stepper tabs are still forced uppercase
- Found during: T3.5
- Where:
html/wp-creation-styles.css:105(.step-tab) - What:
A5scopes sentence case to buttons and field labels, andT3.5removed the forced uppercase from both..step-tabis neither — it is a stepper tab — so it was left, and it is now the only uppercase interactive text on the page. - Why not now: out of
A5's stated scope, andA4/S9rebuild the stepper. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T7.x, with the stepper rebuild.
BL-016 — Back to a URL with no step leaves the wizard on the step it was on
- Found during: T5.1
- Where:
html/work-package-suite-app.js, theWPUrl.onChangehandler - What: the popstate handler reads
parseInt(state.step, 10)and acts only when the result is>= 1. Going from?project=X&step=6back to?project=XyieldsNaN, so nothing happens and the wizard stays on step 6 while the address bar says step 1.T4.2's own probe never caught it because it moves between two URLs that both carry astep, so the NaN branch was never taken. The fix is one expression — treat a missingstepas 1 — but it isS3's code andT4.2's done-whens, notA4's. - Why not now:
CLAUDE.md— do not fix what you notice in passing.T5.1's rail makes it easier to reach (ten keyboard-reachable buttons instead of ten chips) but does not cause it, and folding anS3correction into anA4diff makes both unreviewable. - Suggested wave or follow-up: wave 9, with
C2.tests/stepper_check.pypins the current behaviour with a named check so the fix has a test waiting for it.
BL-017 — The native-dialog baseline metric counts prose
- Found during: T5.1
- Where:
docs/reference/file-map.md§4, metric 1 - What: the metric is
grep -ohE '\b(alert|confirm|prompt)\(' *.js *.html, which matches those words inside comments as readily as inside code. Four comments written duringT5.1— every one of them about removing a dialog — pushed the count from 80 to 82 while the task was deleting two real calls. They were reworded, but the next person to explain a dialog in a comment will move the number again, andT5.8and wave 9 both have to drive it to a target. - Why not now: redefining a wave 0 baseline mid-plan is worse than the noise; the count is comparable to itself as long as everyone measures it the same way.
- Suggested wave or follow-up:
T5.8, which owns the wizard's count, should record a comment-stripped figure alongside the raw one and state both. Wave 9 sets the target against the stripped figure.
BL-018 — The Work Package tab's gate is the last localStorage-derived status
- Found during: T5.3
- Where:
html/work-package-suite-app.js—restoreSavedSOP()setssopComplete,renderWPTab()shows the gate or the creator on it - What:
T4.1moved the launcher's SOP status onto/api/projects/{id}/summary, andaggregates_check.pyproves the card reports the server's answer over a lying cache. The SOP wizard page still decides whether to show the creator or the "complete the SOP Configuration first" gate fromlocalStorage.wp_suite_sop_completeplus awp_suite_stateblob.ProjectData.pullProject()refreshes both from the server on load, so a signed-in user with a working connection is fine — but the two answers come from different places, and the fallback is silent rather than an error state, which is the shapeB4objects to. - Also:
project-data.js:210writeswp_suite_sop_complete = '1'whenever/api/sops/latestreturns any row, including one whosedatacarries nostate. The wizard then holds a browser that believes the SOP is complete and has nothing to restore, sorestoreSavedSOP()bails andsopCompletestays false — the flag is written and never read consistently. Found becausebrowser_check.py's fixture seeds exactly that shape, and a pipeline-strip link consequently landed on the gate.pipeline_check.pyseeds the production shape ({sop, state}) instead. - Why not now:
T5.3is the strip. Changing which source the WP gate trusts changes what the SOP wizard does when offline, andB7/T7.1dissolves that iframe and rewrites this hand-off wholesale. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T7.1, or wave 9 withC2if the gate survives the rebuild unchanged. Either waybrowser_check.py's fixture should adopt the{sop, state}shape so it stops being the only place this discrepancy is visible.
BL-014 — Four controls fall back to the browser's default focus ring
- Found during: T3.4
- Where:
html/index.html.proj-row select,.proj-form-grid input,.link-like;html/field.html.fld-search - What: these have no focus rule, so they get the UA default (
1px auto #111). Visible, so not aC1violation — but it is a fourth focus idiom beside the app's 2px--cds-focusinset ring, and it does not follow the accent if the accent ever changes. - Why not now: adding rings to the launcher and field view is outside
T3.4, whose files are the wizard stylesheet, and both surfaces are touched by later waves anyway. - Suggested wave or follow-up:
T9.5, with theC1audit. - Update, T5.2 — two of the four sites no longer exist.
.proj-row selectand.link-likewent with the project-picker card (B3). The third,.proj-form-grid input, survives in the rebuilt create form and was measured rather than assumed: with CDP focus emulation on it draws2px var(--cds-focus)from the app-wide:where()floorT4.7added, which post-dates this entry. So the launcher half of BL-014 is closed; what is left isfield.html's.fld-search, andT9.5should re-measure that one the same way rather than inheriting this entry's wording.