Implemented the output resolution guidance for the customer review workspace and internal views. Added ReviewPackOutputResolutionGuidance, updated CustomerReviewWorkspace and EnvironmentReviewResource, and added related blade views and tests. Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de> Reviewed-on: #420
110 lines
5.5 KiB
Markdown
110 lines
5.5 KiB
Markdown
# UI-006 Customer Review Workspace
|
|
|
|
| Field | Value |
|
|
| --- | --- |
|
|
| Route | `/admin/reviews/workspace` |
|
|
| Source | `CustomerReviewWorkspace` |
|
|
| Area / scope | Customer review / workspace |
|
|
| Archetype | Customer Workspace |
|
|
| Design depth | Strategic Surface |
|
|
| Repo truth | repo-verified |
|
|
| Screenshot | `../screenshots/desktop/ui-006-customer-review-workspace.png` |
|
|
| Browser status | Reached through local workspace route. |
|
|
|
|
## First Five Seconds
|
|
|
|
This is the most important customer-safe productization candidate. The page should answer what the customer can trust, what changed, what risks are accepted, which evidence supports the state, and what should happen next.
|
|
|
|
Spec 344 tightens the hierarchy so the Operator Summary (decision + acknowledgement + findings signal) comes first, while the review consumption flow and proof panels remain available as supporting details.
|
|
|
|
## Productization Review
|
|
|
|
- Decision-first: improved by explicit Operator Summary-first hierarchy.
|
|
- Evidence-first: must anchor all claims to review/evidence artifacts.
|
|
- Context: workspace-level customer view.
|
|
- Customer/auditor safety: primary concern.
|
|
- Diagnostics: raw/internal details must stay hidden by default.
|
|
|
|
## Information Inventory
|
|
|
|
Default content should include review readiness, review acknowledgement (attestation) state + action, evidence basis, accepted risk summary, decision summary, review-pack download, and a management-readable next action.
|
|
|
|
## Dangerous Actions
|
|
|
|
Customer-facing surface should be read-first. Export/download and publish/review actions need clear scope, audit, and language. The acknowledgement action is a write/mutation action and must remain confirmation-gated, capability-gated, and auditable, without legal/e-signature semantics.
|
|
|
|
## Scores
|
|
|
|
| IA | Density | User Clarity | Sellability | Disclosure | Hierarchy | DS Fit | A11y | Responsive | Components | UX Writing | Perf |
|
|
| ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
|
|
| 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
|
|
|
|
## Top Issues
|
|
|
|
1. Acknowledgement copy must remain customer-safe and explicitly non-legal (no compliance certification semantics).
|
|
2. Evidence and accepted-risk meaning should be visible without raw diagnostics.
|
|
3. Sidebar proof panels can still compete visually with the main decision flow; keep them secondary and avoid duplicating “ready/available” signals at equal weight.
|
|
|
|
## Target Direction
|
|
|
|
Spec 344 implements the first density/hierarchy polish wave. If the surface still feels too dense after real operator use, follow up with a targeted mockup and a second, narrower polish pass rather than adding new workflow surfaces.
|
|
|
|
## Spec 347 Follow-up
|
|
|
|
Spec 347 hardens the Review Pack output contract and aligns the workspace with the review-pack ZIP semantics instead of collapsing everything into a generic "ready" claim.
|
|
|
|
- Decision-card status is now contract-backed and qualified:
|
|
- `Kundensicheres Review-Paket bereit` / `Customer-safe review pack ready`
|
|
- `Veröffentlicht mit Einschränkungen` / `Published with limitations`
|
|
- `Internes Review-Paket verfügbar` / `Internal review package available`
|
|
- `Export nicht bereit` / `Export not ready`
|
|
- Review-pack proof now exposes evidence basis state, section completeness, sharing boundary, PII visibility, protected-values status, disclosure presence, and operation proof in one bounded panel.
|
|
- Download labels are qualified by the same readiness contract instead of implying customer-safe sharing when evidence or section completeness is incomplete.
|
|
- The workspace continues to keep diagnostics collapsed and secondary.
|
|
|
|
### Browser proof
|
|
|
|
- Spec347 screenshots: `specs/347-review-pack-output-contract-readiness-semantics/artifacts/screenshots/`
|
|
- Verified states:
|
|
- customer-safe ready
|
|
- published with limitations
|
|
- internal-only / PII-bearing export
|
|
|
|
### Deferred
|
|
|
|
- The review-pack detail resource and surrounding environment-review detail copy remain intentionally narrow; Spec 347 only touches the workspace/readiness path and supporting handoff copy where needed for contract consistency.
|
|
|
|
## Spec 349 Follow-up
|
|
|
|
Spec 349 productizes the raw Spec-347 readiness semantics into bounded operator guidance instead of exposing a warning wall.
|
|
|
|
- The top decision card now resolves to one dominant output state and one dominant next action:
|
|
- `Output not customer-ready`
|
|
- `Published with limitations`
|
|
- `Internal review package available`
|
|
- `Customer-safe review pack ready`
|
|
- Multiple readiness limitations are grouped behind one compact disclosure instead of competing as peer alerts.
|
|
- Technical details stay collapsed by default and remain available as secondary proof.
|
|
- Download labels are now readiness-qualified across workspace and customer-workspace detail surfaces:
|
|
- `Download customer-safe review pack`
|
|
- `Download internal review pack`
|
|
- `Download review pack with limitations`
|
|
- Environment Review detail now separates:
|
|
- `Review status`
|
|
- `Output readiness`
|
|
- `Publication/sharing state`
|
|
|
|
### Browser proof
|
|
|
|
- Spec349 screenshots: `specs/349-customer-review-workspace-output-resolution-guidance/artifacts/screenshots/`
|
|
- Verified states:
|
|
- output blocked / publication-blocked guidance
|
|
- internal-only / PII-bearing export
|
|
- customer-safe ready
|
|
- limitations and technical-details disclosures collapsed by default
|
|
|
|
### Repo-truth note
|
|
|
|
- The user-draft audit-doc target `ui-009-review-pack-output-contract.md` conflicts with repo truth.
|
|
- `ui-009` is already reserved for Provider Connections, so Spec 349 keeps the durable audit update on `ui-006-customer-review-workspace.md`.
|