Adds a ‡ footnote on H7 (mirroring the H4 boot-latency †): cold :sync ~16 s /
warm ~10 s measured 2026-07-11 — within the ≤30 s v0.1 target, marginal against
the ≤10 s v1.0 target (cold's one-time Wi-Fi+SNTP push it over). Links the
breakdown in notes/sync-latency.md.
quality-house.md mirrored qfd.md's §1/§2 catalogues in a separate file,
which silently drifted (H3 cadence read 20 there vs 64 in qfd). Fold the
House diagram, perception scores, and regen notes into qfd.md §3 with no
section renumbering, so inbound #3/#6/#7 anchors still resolve. Delete
quality-house.md; re-point quality-house-empty.md and the docs index.
Replace the header/status-bar layout with a full-height writing column
plus an always-visible side panel holding all metadata. Canonicalize the
new region vocabulary in CONTEXT.md (Writing column, Side panel) and retire
header / status line / edit area as terms-to-avoid.
Consequent sweeps: rewrite the Error UX section in side-panel terms and
give keyboard-disconnect a home (⌨ ✗, disconnect-only); drop the "line N"
readout; reconcile the render module ops and region shadow; sweep the
status-line/edit-area wording across the technical, roadmap, qfd, notes,
README, and ADR-003 docs (incl. the ~11→~13 line-count figure).
Two stale bits in §4's preamble. (a) "15×15 roof matrix" still
referenced H14's pre-retirement column count — corrected to 14×14.
(b) The symbol legend named classical QFD glyphs (◎ ○ × ⊗) but
quality-house.md's roof actually renders ASCII (++ + − −−). Both
listings now lead with the ASCII glyphs that match the source of
truth, with classical equivalents kept in parens.
The doc previously conflated functions (transformations the device
performs) with characteristics (measurable attributes). Surfacing
Functions as their own ontology layer makes HOW names — which pack
a function reference plus an attribute — readable without function
definitions staying implicit.
- new GLOSSARY.md at root: 5-layer ontology stack (WHAT / Function /
Characteristic / Metric+Unit / Target), peer to CONTEXT.md
(device-specific vocabulary)
- qfd.md §2 opens with a Functions inventory (Type, Save, Publish,
Recover, Boot, Provision); Render and Reconnect noted as
sub-functions; Provision flagged as build-time-only in v0.1
- H1 "Keypress → glyph latency" → "Type latency (keypress → glyph)"
- H4 "Cold boot → cursor ready" → "Boot latency (cold)"
(the arrow transformation moves to the Functions inventory; the
parenthetical keeps the residual qualifier)
- cascade through §3 priority list, §6 critical-performance-budget
rows for H1/H4, §8 inconsistencies, and quality-house.md TikZ
column labels
Matrix cell strengths held; no Σ recompute.
Module count / public-API surface is a static source-code property,
not a runtime function nor an artifact characteristic like H10 binary
or H15 build time. It was a refactor-leverage proxy for W9 — proxies
of proxies belong in the ADRs and the component matrix, not in the
HoQ. Removed from §2, §5 matrix, §4 conflict list, and the C12
overloaded-list mention; basement Σ total drops 1674 → 1557 so rel%
recomputed in quality-house.md.
Captures "I can carry the device and write away from a desk" as a
distinct WHAT from W11 (multi-day battery), weight 8. Recomputed
basement Σ (1546→1674); H8 climbs #6→#3 in the §3 priority list as
its voter base widens to include W14, and H12 enters the top six at
#4. §6's "(b) narrow voter base" override for H8 is retired and a new
§7 ADR-008 vs W11+W14 unresolved-conflict bullet records that wall
power in v0.1 now disappoints two WHATs, not one.
Drop the duplicated 13x15 strength matrix and 15x15 roof tables from
qfd.md; the same data already lives in quality-house.md's TikZ source.
qfd.md §3/§4 keep the narrative reading (priority list, conflict list)
and point to quality-house.md for the cells and basement sums. Both
files' regenerate/maintenance notes flipped to reflect the new contract.
Renders qfd.md §1-§4 as a classical House of Quality with 13 WHATs x 15
HOWs, roof correlations, and a perception zone scoring reMarkable 2,
Freewrite Traveler, and Pomera DM250 against the v0.1 target. Scores are
guessed, not measured; rationale and caveats are in the doc.
The old ADR documented the specific panel choice (GDEY0579T93 + DESPI-c579)
as if it were a freshly weighed option, but the hardware was already on
hand — the real architectural decision was choosing the medium (e-ink over
FSTN graphical / Sharp Memory LCD / OLED-TFT). Rewrite the ADR around the
medium with the panel as instantiation, note the Freewrite Alpha (2023)
data point as honest expectation-setting, and propagate the anchor /
narrative changes through qfd.md, v0.1-mvp-product.md, and README.md.
Convert every `ADR-NNN` mention in qfd.md to a `[ADR-NNN]` shortcut
reference and add the link definitions at the bottom of the file, so
each ADR mention navigates to the matching adr.md section.
- Re-anchor W1..W4 source links to the renumbered v0.1 user stories
(story 1 "First run" was deleted in the v0.1 refresh).
- W2 now points at ADR-010 and CONTEXT.md as well as the product spec.
- W4 reframed from "first-run setup" to "one-shot provisioning, never
repeated mid-session" so it covers both the v0.1 build-time path and
the v0.9 on-device path.
- ADR-005 tradeoff row rewritten: "captive-portal form" was wrong after
the v0.1 refresh; replaced with the binary-as-secret-store framing.
- New ADR-010 row in the tradeoffs table.
- Read-across notes flag that C12 owns ADR-010's implementation but not
its UX contract, and that C11 LittleFS is unused in v0.1.
- Section 8 picks up three new cross-doc inconsistencies that were
spotted and fixed during the refresh (commit-message format mismatch,
captive-portal vs. solo target user, vocabulary leak resolved by
CONTEXT.md).
The customer-requirements (WHATs) Source column was plain text ("product
§UX", "README v0.8"). Replace with anchored Markdown links into the
product spec, README, and roadmap so each requirement's provenance is
one click away.
Translates user-facing requirements (the WHATs) into engineering
functions (the HOWs) and components, with a House-of-Quality matrix,
roof tradeoffs, function→component mapping (anchored to ADRs), and a
critical performance budget keyed to upcoming spikes. Cross-references
adr.md throughout.
