Privacy-Period-Tracker/docs/design/README.md

# Design

```
Status: Current
Owner: _null
Last reviewed: 2026-08-18
Governs: docs/design/**, core/designsystem/** — the design tokens — and the
         product's tone and interface copy
Review trigger: Any new user-facing screen or state; any change to the colour or
                type tokens; any change to notification copy or to a privacy or
                fertility disclaimer
```

## Where the detail is

The screen-by-screen specification and the actual words are
[`../planning/PRODUCT_PLAN.md`](../planning/PRODUCT_PLAN.md), and they are not
repeated here — a second copy of interface copy is how two versions of a
disclaimer come to exist.

| Subject | Section it owns |
| --- | --- |
| Onboarding, seven screens, with copy | §19, §56 |
| Navigation — four tabs | §20 |
| Today screen and its six dynamic states | §21, §22 |
| Period logging, period end, spotting | §23, §24, §25 |
| Calendar states and markers | §26 |
| Insights | §27 |
| Notification modes, types and flow | §28, §29, §30 |
| Incognito launcher | §32 |
| Look and feel, visual direction, typography, motion | §37, §38, §40, §41 |
| Colour | §39 — **superseded by [`BRAND_GUIDE.md`](BRAND_GUIDE.md)**; see [Colour](#colour) below |
| Artwork | §42 |
| Accessibility | §43 |

This document holds what governs those: the tone, and the rules that decide an
argument the specification did not anticipate.

## Tone

Calm, private, intelligent, adult. The app is a good utility with warmth — it is
not clinical, not childish, not gamified, and not stereotypically feminine as an
identity. It never celebrates a period and never alarms about one.

One paragraph, and it settles most small arguments: **the app speaks like
someone competent who is not making a fuss.** "Your period is late!" is out.
"Not yet?" with an updated forecast is in.

## Four rules that decide the arguments

**1. The number is the hero.** The forecast dominates the Today screen —
[§38](../planning/PRODUCT_PLAN.md). Anything competing with it for attention is
wrong, including anything of ours.

**2. Nothing asserts certainty the model does not have.** A window and a
confidence label, never a bare exact date presented as fact. "Estimated
ovulation", never "you are ovulating today". Every **screen** that shows a
fertility estimate carries the not-contraception line, which is where
[§18](../planning/PRODUCT_PLAN.md) scopes it — "near fertility features and in
About". Notification copy is the deliberate exception: it says "Estimated
fertile window" and stops, because a disclaimer is a long sentence about
fertility on a lock screen.

**3. State is never colour alone.** Confirmed period is a solid fill, predicted
is dotted or outlined, fertile window is a ring, ovulation is its own small
marker — distinguishable in greyscale, because that is also what makes them
distinguishable to a colourblind user and to a screenshot in a bug report.
Predicted and confirmed days must never look identical.

**4. Ads never touch a health action.** No banner in onboarding, in the
period-start confirmation, in the period-end confirmation, or between steps of a
health workflow — and never an interstitial after logging
([§33](../planning/PRODUCT_PLAN.md)).

**The banner space is reserved before there is an ad to put in it.** §48 wants no
layout jump when one loads and a graceful gap when one fails, and both are
properties of the space existing whether or not it is filled. Retrofitting the
reservation in Batch 07 means shipping the jump first and finding it in a QA
round. It is empty and invisible now — deliberately not a "your ad here" box,
which would be a placeholder for the thing a user pays to remove.

## Colour

The palette is [`BRAND_GUIDE.md`](BRAND_GUIDE.md), supplied by the project owner
on 2026-08-18. It **supersedes** the sketch in
[`../planning/PRODUCT_PLAN.md` §39](../planning/PRODUCT_PLAN.md) where the two
differ, and one difference is worth stating rather than leaving to be discovered:

> **§39 asks for a muted teal or sage fertile window. The brand guide is plum
> and rose throughout, and gives fertility its own pink (`#E891AE`).**

The guide wins — it is newer, it is the owner's, and a teal accent inside this
identity would look borrowed from another app. What §39 was protecting is kept
by other means, and this is the part that matters: **the calendar's states
differ in shape, not only in colour.** A solid disc, a dotted ring, a continuous
ring and a star stay tellable apart in greyscale and to a colourblind user, which
is what §43 actually requires. Colour is the second signal here, never the only
one.

The two rules from §39 that survive unchanged, because they are product
decisions rather than colour preferences:

- **Period state** is a sophisticated rose or plum — never graphic blood-red.
- **Nothing reads as "safe".** The fertile window is pink rather than green for
  the same reason the labels say "Lower likelihood": this app never gives
  permission.

Everything goes through Material 3 colour roles and centralized tokens in
`core/designsystem`. **No hard-coded colours in a Composable** — a colour
literal outside the token file is a review failure.

## Both themes, every time

Dark mode was broken for the whole of Batch 01 and nothing said so. `PeriodTheme`
was not wrapping its content in a `Surface`, so any `Text` without an explicit
colour inherited Material's default — black — and the app's own background never
painted at all. **In light mode that looked correct by accident**, because dark
text on cream is what was wanted anyway; in dark mode the onboarding headings
were near-black on charcoal.

No test caught it and no test easily would. It was found by opening the app.

Two rules follow. Every screen gets a **preview pair, light and dark** — cheap,
and it puts the failure in front of whoever is editing. And the `Surface` lives
in the theme rather than in each screen, so a screen without a `Scaffold` cannot
forget it.

## The states most often left undesigned

Designed here on purpose, because they are the two most people meet first:

- **Empty** — no periods logged yet. It has to make the next action obvious
  rather than apologise.
- **Learning** — one or two cycles recorded. The app says it is still learning
  rather than showing a confident forecast it has not earned. "Getting to know
  your pattern", not a percentage.

## The in-app artwork is placeholder, and says so here

Every illustration and calendar marker in the app is a **Compose vector path**
in [`core/designsystem/src/main/kotlin/dev/privacyllc/period/designsystem/art/`](../../core/designsystem/src/main/kotlin/dev/privacyllc/period/designsystem/art/), written as PRODUCT_PLAN.md §42 asks: polished
placeholders behind replaceable names, so real artwork changes one function body
and no call site.

Real brand artwork exists — the owner's sources in [`brand/`](brand/) and the
three exported marks in [`../data/img/`](../data/img/) — and none of it is in the
app yet. The launcher icon keeps its simplified vector because the supplied
emblem has content close to its edges and an adaptive icon masks about a quarter
of the canvas away, so dropping it in unmodified would crop the shield. Fitting
it to the safe zone is Batch 08's final-artwork work.

### What the artwork has to do

Two things at once, stated by the owner and recorded here because it is the brief
every remaining art issue is judged against: **welcoming, and visibly private.**
Not alternating between them screen by screen — a warm opening followed by a bare
form is how onboarding reads today, and the privacy idea currently appears on
exactly one screen out of seven.

Welcoming is the harder half to get right without breaking [Tone](#tone): warmth
here means an app that looks like it was made with care, never one that
celebrates a period or decorates it. Private is already half-solved in the
vocabulary — `PrivacyIllustration` encloses a ring in a shield, and enclosure
reads as protection without reaching for a padlock, which would read as a
security product rather than a calm one.

The onboarding half of that brief now has a decided direction: seven concept
cards, one per step, in [`dist/`](dist/). They are references and not shipping
assets — raster, with their titles painted into the pixels, light mode only, and
card 7 shows a fertile window the first-forecast screen deliberately withholds.
[`dist/README.md`](dist/README.md) says why each of those disqualifies them from
`res/drawable`, so that nobody mistakes a decided direction for a finished asset.

The remaining art is tracked as issues #29 to #32, not listed here.

The visual language is deliberately narrow — **overlapping circular forms** and
nothing else. §42's forbidden list (blood drops, tampons, pads, uterus imagery,
gender symbols, anatomy) is a product decision rather than squeamishness: this
app gets opened in public, and somebody glancing over a shoulder should learn
nothing. That is a property of the pictures as much as of the notification text.

**Note the deliberate inconsistency with `docs/data/img/`,** where a placeholder
is forbidden. The rule there is that an image which looks finished outlives the
issue that would have replaced it, because nobody files a ticket against
something that appears done. In-app assets escape that because §42 asks for them
explicitly and the replaceable-name mechanism is what keeps them replaceable —
and because a screen with no illustration cannot be evaluated at all, while a
project card with no icon simply shows initials.

## Include the rejected version

For any decision that was genuinely close, record what was not chosen and why.
Without it the same option is proposed again every few months and re-argued from
nothing. The first entries belong to whoever makes those calls; the
specification's `Avoid:` lists are already a partial record of them.

## What does not belong here

- How it is built — [`../architecture/README.md`](../architecture/README.md)
- Scope and audience — [`../planning/PROJECT_PLAN.md`](../planning/PROJECT_PLAN.md)