Component Pragmatics
Next: Add a PICKUP.md (or a Stage 2 CYCLE.md) so it reads as parked, and list it in CYCLES.md. · Pick a new model codebase: app.qpoint.io is stale; the qdash app is the likely source of worked examples.
last activity Aug 16
We had principles for shared components, but no rules for the moment of making one: a reusable pattern or a one-off special part, shared or local?
Not started. The question and where to look for answers were written down; no rules, skill or worked examples were produced.
Documents
With file names, on their own page →Start here
What changed
The change that matters most, in plain words. Open any one to see it.
- 1
The gap was named: nothing guides the choice of what kind of component to build.
The question, written down · came from Mark Parson
- The concrete card extraction became its own cycle, so neither waits on the other. In words
How we got here
Each change, traced back to the conversation it came from. A solid mark means the record names the source; a dashed one was matched by the draft and waits for review.
From the record: no recorded conversation behind this one.
No ruling needed: the work itself is the change.
The gap was named: nothing guides the choice of what kind of component to build.
Thanks to
People outside Qpoint first. Every thank-you points at something they said or made.
Asked whether we have rules for making components
Raised the pattern-versus-specialty question (a Slack config panel used once or twice) and pointed at app.qpoint.io as the model to learn from.
All images
Every picture from this cycle. Click any one to step through them all.
The pairs
Everything captured · 0
The full record 0 decisions · 0 key-change entries · 0 words · 0 captures
The record stays as written, for agents and for audit: Key Changes, every decision, the artifacts and the visual record.
Open the record for c74 →