Project-SDE-WP-Suite/docs/waves/backlog.md

# 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

```markdown
### 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-001` accepts 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-006` toggles 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 `T9.1` PR.
- **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 compares
  `documentElement.scrollWidth` against `clientWidth` at each capture. `F2` covers 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) are `F2` and are already scheduled.
- **Why not now:** wave 1 is scoped to `F1`–`F5`, and `T7.1` dissolves 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:815` has
  `@media (max-width: 860px) { body { --nav-w: 56px; } }`, which is correct. But
  `wp-creation-app.js:1389` injects `body{--nav-w:288px;}` into a runtime `<style>` with no
  media query. Injected last, same specificity, so it **wins over the media query** and
  `--nav-w` stays 288px at every width. Everything keyed off it then reserves 288px of
  rail that is not there: `.main` padding-left `calc(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`:** every `position: fixed; right: 0` element 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. `T1.4` reports this as an attributed note rather than a drawer defect,
  so nobody is sent to the wrong file.
- **Update, T7.1 - the recorded root cause no longer applies.** Measured after the
  rebuild by `tests/frame_check.py` section 6: at a 390px viewport the creator's
  `scrollWidth` is still **485** against a `clientWidth` of 390, so the overflow
  survives - but `--nav-w` now computes to **56px**, which is the media query
  winning. The injected `body{--nav-w:288px}` explanation above is spent; whatever
  fixed it, it was not this task.
  What is left is a different thing entirely: the widest in-flow boxes are the
  creator's **data tables**. `#asset-body`'s table lays out at **520px** with no
  scroll container around it, and the other card tables do the same. The probe
  reports the offending boxes by selector each run, and deliberately skips
  anything inside a `position: fixed` subtree - the comments drawer is parked
  off-screen by `translateX(100%)` and its five static children sit out at
  `right: 844`, which made the first measurement blame the drawer. That is how
  this entry got attributed to the wrong file once already; twice would be a
  pattern.
  **Not fixed here.** `T7.1` bundles nothing, and the fix is a layout decision -
  a scroll container, a stacked card at narrow widths, or fewer columns - which
  belongs with `T7.2` laying the form out again. `frame_check.py` **pins** the
  current failure, so the check turns red the moment it is fixed and whoever
  fixes it is told to close this entry.
- **Update, T1.2:** the 1440px half of this is **resolved as a side effect**, not by intent.
  The unbreakable `#wp-usermenu` run that `T1.2` fixed 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 so `T7.1` still checks it.
- **Update, T7.2 - the data-table attribution is spent as well, and the cause has
  moved a third time.** T7.2 collapses every section at rest, and a collapsed card's
  tables are `hidden` - they lay out nothing. The at-rest overflow is now
  **scrollWidth 481 vs 390**, and the widest box is `help.js`'s `.help-tip::after`
  tooltip, which is rendered (not `display:none`) even when idle and escapes its
  16px badge to the right. The tables still overflow **when their section is
  expanded** - that half of the T7.1 note stands and still belongs to a layout
  decision (scroll container, stacked card, or fewer columns).
  **Deliberately not fixed in T7.2:** the help tip is the `S8` component, rebuilt
  whole at `T9.5` - a fix here would be thrown away with the component. `T9.5`
  owns this entry now. `tests/form_structure_check.py` reports the measurement on
  every run, and `tests/frame_check.py` keeps the failure pinned so the entry
  cannot be closed by silence.

### 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`/`F5` cite the focus-ring removal at `322-328` only. The same
  `outline: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`'s `link()`)
- **What:** every link in the app bar's user menu — including `Sign out` — renders 16px
  tall, from `font:400 13px/1.2`. `T1.2` made 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:** `T1.2` is explicitly triage and `T2.2` replaces 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:** `T2.2` should ship the drawer with adequate targets;
  `C1`'s audit at `T9.5` confirms 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 in `CLAUDE.md` does reach it, so it is real
  work, not a non-issue.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** wave 9, alongside `C4`. Documented in
  `docs/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) and `html/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 into `style=` 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 under `C1`.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** `T9.5`, with the `C1` audit.

### BL-006 — Seventeen half-pixel font sizes

- **Found during:** T3.1
- **Where:** `html/wp-creation-styles.css` (14) and `html/wp-chrome.css` (3)
- **What:** `9.5px`, `10.5px`, `11.5px`, `12.5px`, `13.5px` sit 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; `T3.2` forbids rendered
  change and `T7.1` re-lays-out this page anyway.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** `T7.1`. See `docs/reference/tokens.md` §6a.
- **Re-measured at T7.1, unchanged.** `frame_check.py` counts **15** half-pixel
  sizes in `wp-creation-styles.css` by `\d+\.5px`, which is the whole sheet
  rather than the font-size subset this entry counted, so the two numbers are not
  the same measurement and the difference is not a change. `T7.1` re-laid out the
  page's chrome, not its type. Carried to `T7.2`, which lays out the form.

### BL-007 — `--radius: 0` is contradicted 45 times in the sheet that declares it

- **Found during:** T3.1
- **Where:** `html/wp-creation-styles.css:26` and 45 raw `border-radius` values in the same file
- **What:** the creator declares `--radius: 0` and honours it 23 times, then writes `2px 3px
  4px 5px 6px 8px 9px 10px 12px 14px 20px 50%` directly in 45 other places, plus two
  asymmetric CTA radii at `:707` and `: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 `T3.2` must
  produce none.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** `T7.1`. See `docs/reference/tokens.md` §6c.
- **Re-measured at T7.1: 68, not 45.** `frame_check.py` counts raw
  `border-radius:` declarations that do not resolve through a `var()`. The rise is
  the counting method rather than 23 new radii - this entry counted values, the
  probe counts declarations - but the direction is the point: nothing has reduced
  it in four waves, and it is measured every run now instead of once. Carried to
  `T7.2`.

### 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 with `rgba(37,99,214,0.07)`, which is **`#2563d6`**, not the suite's `#0f62fe`.
  `help.js` carries the same blue at `.15` alpha 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 `T3.2` forbids. It is the same
  conversation as the green action buttons.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** wave 9, with `C4`. `T3.5` is scoped to buttons; this is a field fill. See `docs/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 the `T3.1` inventory, which is why it survived this long.
- **Why not now:** merging it moves a rendered colour, which `T3.2` forbids. `T3.2` named it
  `--wp-status-warning-text-alt` so it is visible rather than hidden in a hex.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** wave 9, with `C4`. `T3.5` is scoped to buttons; this is a status pill. See `docs/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:** `T3.2` removed 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`, `--sans` all resolve from
  `theme-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 11px` maps
  to without changing one of the two numbers. `T3.2` forbids changing a rendered value, so
  tokenising these and honouring that constraint are mutually exclusive. This is the one `T3.2`
  done-when not met, and it is recorded as not met rather than quietly skipped.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** `T5.x` and `T7.1`, where these pages are re-laid-out and the
  values are being chosen again anyway. See `docs/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 are `position: fixed` with their own `z-index` — but any test that
  keys elements by sibling index sees dozens of phantom differences on this page. It cost real
  time in `T3.2` before the cause was found, and `tests/token_check.py` now 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 `T7.1` is 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.py` output for `admin-390`, `admin-1440`, `creator-1440`
- **What:** the task brief's trap 2 says `admin.html` and `users.html` are not byte-stable.
  Measured by capturing wave 2 against itself: **`users` is stable at both widths**, and the
  unstable third is the **creator at 1440px** (344,272 px differ, bbox 288,14→1439,4924).
  `admin` is 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.py` now
  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: none` on every input, textarea and
  select) and `:171` (`:focus` replaces it with `box-shadow: 0 0 0 3px var(--accent-dim)`)
- **What:** the same defect `BL-002` recorded in the wizard sheet, in the sheet next door.
  Measured in the browser with focus emulation on: a focused creator input reports
  `outline-style: none`, and its only focus cue is a 3px `#edf5ff` glow against a `#ffffff`
  field — a 1.05:1 edge. `.wp-nav-search:focus` (`:765`) is the same. That is `CLAUDE.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, and `BL-002` scoped the
  three sites it folded in to that sheet. The creator is rebuilt at `T7.1`/`T7.2`.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** `T7.2`, or `T9.5` with the `C1` audit if it survives the
  rebuild. The fix is the ring `T3.4` established: `outline: 2px solid var(--cds-focus);
  outline-offset: -2px`, which `console.css`, `wp-chrome.css` and now the wizard all use.
- **CLOSED at T7.1 - it was already fixed, and this entry was stale.**
  `wp-creation-styles.css:209` carries an `S12` comment naming this entry, and
  `:219` sets exactly the ring prescribed above. So it was closed in **wave 4**,
  by `S12`, and nobody came back to say so - the same way `BL-014`'s launcher half
  turned out to be closed by `T4.7`.
  Measured rather than read, twice: `frame_check.py` reports a focused creator
  input as `outline solid 2px`, and `a11y_check.py` walks **120 focusable elements
  on the creator** and finds every one of them ringing at 3:1 or better.
  Worth saying plainly, because this entry was quoted as a live `CLAUDE.md`
  violation while planning wave 7 and it had not been true for four waves: a
  backlog entry is a claim with a date on it. Re-measure before acting on one.
  The first thing `frame_check.py` does with focus is assert
  `document.hasFocus()`, because an earlier draft called `page.call` instead of
  `page.ws.call` inside a `try/except` and silently measured nothing at all -
  which reported "no ring" for every control and looked exactly like a finding.

### 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:** `A5` scopes sentence case to buttons and field labels, and `T3.5` removed the
  forced uppercase from both. `.step-tab` is 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, and `A4`/`S9` rebuild 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`, the `WPUrl.onChange` handler
- **What:** the popstate handler reads `parseInt(state.step, 10)` and acts only when
  the result is `>= 1`. Going from `?project=X&step=6` back to `?project=X` yields
  `NaN`, 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 a `step`, so the NaN branch was never taken. The fix is one expression —
  treat a missing `step` as 1 — but it is `S3`'s code and `T4.2`'s done-whens, not
  `A4`'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 an `S3` correction into an `A4` diff makes both
  unreviewable.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** wave 9, with `C2`. `tests/stepper_check.py` pins 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
  during `T5.1` — 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, and `T5.8` and
  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()` sets `sopComplete`,
  `renderWPTab()` shows the gate or the creator on it
- **What:** `T4.1` moved the *launcher's* SOP status onto `/api/projects/{id}/summary`, and
  `aggregates_check.py` proves 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 from `localStorage.wp_suite_sop_complete` plus a `wp_suite_state`
  blob. `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 shape `B4` objects to.
- **Also:** `project-data.js:210` writes `wp_suite_sop_complete = '1'` whenever
  `/api/sops/latest` returns any row, including one whose `data` carries no `state`. The
  wizard then holds a browser that believes the SOP is complete and has nothing to restore,
  so `restoreSavedSOP()` bails and `sopComplete` stays false — the flag is written and never
  read consistently. Found because `browser_check.py`'s fixture seeds exactly that shape, and
  a pipeline-strip link consequently landed on the gate. `pipeline_check.py` seeds the
  production shape (`{sop, state}`) instead.
- **Why not now:** `T5.3` is the strip. Changing which source the WP gate trusts changes what
  the SOP wizard does when offline, and `B7`/`T7.1` dissolves that iframe and rewrites this
  hand-off wholesale.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** `T7.1`, or wave 9 with `C2` if the gate survives the
  rebuild unchanged. Either way `browser_check.py`'s fixture should adopt the `{sop, state}`
  shape so it stops being the only place this discrepancy is visible.
- **Update, T7.1 - the gate survived, and this has now cost a fourth probe.**
  The WP tab is no longer a frame swap, but it is still gated on `sopComplete`,
  which is still `restoreSavedSOP()`'s answer. `frame_check.py` had every
  creator route land on the gate panel until it seeded a readable SOP; it now
  **imports `set_sop` from `sections_check.py`** rather than writing a fifth
  copy, so the workaround is in one place and disappears when the fixture is
  fixed. Four probes is enough evidence: `T9.9` owns it.

### BL-019 — A cost code that has left the list is silently blanked on edit

- **Found during:** T5.6
- **Where:** `html/wp-creation-app.js` — `buildCostCodes()` at `:185`, consumed by
  `loadPackageIntoForm()`
- **What:** `wp_cost` is a `<select>` built from the hardcoded `COST_CODES` array, and
  `loadPackageIntoForm` sets `.value` from the saved package. Setting `.value` to something
  with no matching `<option>` does nothing at all — silently — so opening a package whose
  cost code has since been removed from the array, or that was imported from elsewhere,
  clears the field. The next save writes the blank back over the record.
- **The same class of bug was already fixed once**, for `gov_wosize` in
  `work-package-suite-app.js:490-495`, by adding the stored value as an option when it is not
  a preset. The comment there names the reason: "if a saved value isn't one of the presets,
  add it as an option so the round-trip preserves it." Cost code never got the same treatment.
- **Found because** a `T5.6` probe used an invented cost code to prove that hiding a field
  does not delete its value, and the value came back empty — which looked like the toggle
  eating data and was not. The probe now uses a real code and says why.
- **Why not now:** `T5.6` hides two fields; it does not own how one of them round-trips, and
  a fix here changes what is written back to existing records — which wants its own diff.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** wave 9. The fix is the four lines already written for
  `gov_wosize`.

### 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 a `C1` violation — but it is a fourth focus idiom beside the app's 2px `--cds-focus`
  inset 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 the `C1` audit.
- **Update, T5.2 — two of the four sites no longer exist.** `.proj-row select` and
  `.link-like` went 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 draws `2px var(--cds-focus)` from the app-wide `:where()` floor
  `T4.7` added, which post-dates this entry. So the launcher half of BL-014 is closed;
  what is left is `field.html`'s `.fld-search`, and `T9.5` should re-measure that one the
  same way rather than inheriting this entry's wording.

### BL-020 — Switching from the SOP wizard to the creator can now prompt to leave

- **Found during:** T7.1
- **Where:** `html/wp-autosave.js:96` (the `beforeunload` guard), reached from the
  tool tabs in `html/work-package-suite.html`
- **What:** the Work Package Creation and Dashboard tabs used to swap an iframe
  inside one document. Since `B7`/`T7.1` they are links to another document, so
  leaving the wizard with unsaved SOP edits fires `T4.3`'s unsaved-work guard and
  the browser asks whether to leave. The guard is behaving exactly as designed;
  what changed is that a routine tab switch is now a page exit.
  Nothing is lost either way - the guard writes the draft before prompting, and
  `T4.3`'s recovery restores it on return - so this is friction, not data loss.
  Note that `sopIsDirty()` compares against the fingerprint taken at load and at
  `completeSOP()`, so **typing anything at all** makes the wizard dirty until the
  SOP is completed. On a twelve-step form that is most of the time somebody spends
  on it.
- **Why not now:** suppressing a deliberate guard for one navigation is a product
  decision with a real downside - it is the same mechanism that stops a closed tab
  losing work - and `T7.1` is forbidden to bundle anything. Found by
  `frame_check.py`, which filters the console line rather than hiding it, and says
  why in the comment.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** wave 9, with `C2`. If it is to be suppressed,
  the honest version is an in-app navigation that flushes the draft and marks the
  departure intentional, not a blanket disabling of the guard. If it is to be
  kept, `T7.2`'s side navigation is the place to make saving obvious enough that
  the prompt stops being a surprise.

### BL-021 — `project_sop_team()` reads a path `pushSOP` never writes

- **Found during:** T7.6
- **Where:** `server/app.py`, `project_sop_team()`
- **What:** the function reads `sop.data["project"]`, but `ProjectData.pushSOP`
  stores every SOP row as `data = {sop: ..., state: ...}` — the project block
  lives at `data["sop"]["project"]`. The lookup therefore always returns `[]`,
  and the critical-constraint-reopened email (Phase S wave) has never actually
  reached the PM or CM it names as recipients; only the owner and distribution
  got it. Found while writing `project_qa_group()` for `CR-014`, which reads the
  correct path (and tolerates the flat one for safety).
- **Why not now:** T7.6 is scoped to the QA gate; fixing another feature's
  recipient list inside it is the drive-by CLAUDE.md forbids. The fix is one
  line, but it deserves its own verification against the capture sink.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** wave 9 backlog sweep (`T9.9`), verified with
  the `tests/qa_gate_check.py` sink pattern.

### BL-022 — F6's "roughly two screen heights": 2.17 against a strict 2.0

- **Found during:** T7.2, re-measured at the wave 7 exit
- **Where:** `html/wp-creation-index.html` page chrome; `tests/form_structure_check.py`
- **What:** the creator at rest measures **1,954px against a 900px viewport at
  1440px** — 2.17 screens. `D3` amended `F6`'s criterion to "no single view
  exceeds roughly two screen heights at rest"; the probe encodes "roughly two"
  strictly as 2.0 and is red by ~154px. The remainder is page chrome, not form:
  the context bar (~67px), the release banner (~45px + margin), and header/
  toolbar spacing. The form itself went from 5,399px to this.
- **Why not now:** the criterion was amended once already, in writing (`D3`).
  Deciding that 2.17 "is roughly 2" — or trimming chrome that other items placed
  deliberately (`A2` made the banner the ONE warning; the context bar is the
  SOP identity strip) — is a product call, not an implementation detail.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** needs Nick. Either bless 2.17 (one-line probe
  change, criterion satisfied as written) or name the chrome to compress and it
  becomes a small T9 task. The strict check stays red so the question cannot be
  forgotten.

### BL-023 — Productivity factor: actual against estimated hours

- **Found during:** T9.2 (logged as that task's done-when requires)
- **Where:** future — dashboard / rollups
- **What:** Actual Hours is tracked (CR-017, deliberately kept) and estimated
  hours exist on every package; nothing yet compares them. A productivity
  factor (actual ÷ estimated, rolled up by discipline / building / type the way
  CR-018 rolls cost) is the measurement Marlena's tracking exists to enable.
  The rollup endpoints (`/api/wps/metrics`, `/api/projects/{id}/summary`)
  already carry both sums, so this is a presentation task, not a data one.
- **Why not now:** new scope — needs its own item id per the working rules, and
  a product conversation about where it displays and who reads it.
- **Suggested wave or follow-up:** next revision; needs Nick for placement.