3.5 KiB
Data —
Status: Current
Owner: <who maintains this>
Last reviewed: <YYYY-MM-DD>
Governs: docs/data/** — the assets privacyllc.dev renders for this project
Review trigger: A rebrand, or any change to the icon, logo or banner
What goes here
Three files, in img/, at exactly these names:
docs/data/img/icon.webp the square mark, used wherever the project is listed
docs/data/img/logo.webp the full lockup, used on the project page
docs/data/img/banner.webp the wide image, used across the project header
All webp. All required. Only img/ is checked — an asset left in
docs/data/ instead of docs/data/img/ is not found.
Dimensions, weights and how to generate them are in
img/README.md, beside the files they describe. This
document owns the rule; that one owns the spec. Stating both in both places is
how two copies of one convention start disagreeing.
No placeholders ship with this template, deliberately. It carried a 0-byte
logo.webp once, and an empty file is the worst of the three states: a check
that asks "does the path exist" calls it present, and anything that reads the
bytes rejects it — a consumer verifying the webp signature answers 415, which
reads as a corrupt asset rather than a missing one. Absent is honest and the
conformance check reports it as absent, which is what gets it filled in.
Extra sizes and variants are welcome beside them — icon-512.webp,
logo-dark.webp — and are not treated as clutter. Only the three exact names
are checked for.
If an asset is missing, open an issue — do not invent one
An agent cannot draw a logo, and this is the one gap in the whole convention that cannot be closed by writing a file.
So when an asset is absent, file an issue rather than producing something:
title it for the asset, label it P2, and end the body with its Verify: line
— Verify: docs/data/img/logo.webp exists and the project card renders it.
Do not generate a placeholder. A placeholder that looks deliberate outlives the issue that would have replaced it: nobody files a ticket against an image that appears to be finished. An obviously absent asset keeps asking.
Why this folder is different from every other one here
The Command Center consumes these. Every other document in this tree is written for a person to read; these are fetched and rendered on privacyllc.dev's project page.
That has one consequence worth stating plainly: this folder cannot be declared
exempt. A repository may tell the conformance check that a required document is
deliberately absent — kept out of git on purpose, say — and the check will
believe it. It will not accept that declaration for docs/data/, because the
result would be a project card with nothing to show and nothing explaining why,
which is the exact failure the check exists to prevent.
Why webp and not PNG
One format, checked by its magic bytes rather than its file extension, so the site can serve it inline with confidence. A file whose first bytes are RIFF/WEBP cannot be an HTML document or an SVG carrying script, which is what makes it safe to render directly rather than forcing a download.
Renaming a PNG to .webp will not work, and is meant not to.
This is not an asset library
Screenshots, mockups, reference art and exported source files do not belong here. They belong wherever the project already keeps them. This folder holds the three marks that identify the project elsewhere, and stays small enough that its contents are obvious at a glance.