docs: record the measured mobile-width divergence and the refuted text hypothesis - #36
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
Three harness repairs (#34, #35) were needed before \harness/render\ could run at all. The finding they bought is worth more than the repairs, and it currently exists only in a chat transcript.
The measurement
\landing, acquired fresh and compared against Figma's own PNG, on \main\ at \2df7fb4\ with a binary containing the W8 JSX text fix:
It refutes the hypothesis that motivated the repairs
The supposition was that the mobile gap was largely the JSX whitespace defect W8 fixed, since a narrow width wraps more and the three texts \ ext-check.mjs\ flagged were one paragraph at three widths.
Unchanged to two decimal places. W8 fixed a real defect; it is not this one.
What it actually is
\drift.mjs\ aligns each band independently. The offset that minimises the difference grows monotonically down the page - 0 → 2 → 5 → 6 → 8 - and y 900-1000 goes from 23.5% in place to 14.2% shifted five pixels. The frame total is correct (both 360x2955), so the sum is right while the internal distribution is not.
That is a small height deficit accumulating from the top, not a set of individually wrong elements. \�ands.mjs\ puts the worst bands ~700px apart, which reads as one error recurring at a repeating section boundary.
Vertical sizing or spacing, not text. Which property accumulates the ~8px - padding, gap, line-height, or FILL/HUG distribution - is open, and \�oxes.mjs\ is the cheapest way to name it. The doc says so rather than guessing.
Docs only; no \crates/\ change, so no changepack applies.