2.3 KiB
2.3 KiB
Design — Queue North Website
Status: Current
Owner: _null
Last reviewed: 2026-08-18
Governs: docs/design/**
Review trigger: Any new user-facing surface, or a change to the product's tone
Documents here
Two, and they answer different questions. Both predate the template and both are this project's own writing.
| Document | Owns |
|---|---|
OVERHAUL_PLAN.md |
what it looks like — Tailwind theme tokens, the numeric-typography rule (Georgia for all numeric content), the type scale, section spacing and container sizes, radius/shadow/border rules, which shadcn-style primitives to use, the per-page layout blueprints, and the explicit anti-patterns. Its earlier Migration Phases and Agent Plan sections are history; the brief onward is live |
REDESIGN_REVIEW.md |
what it sounds like — the B2B positioning argument, the messaging shift from "interesting technical person" to "reliable communications and IT partner", and the anti-patterns of tone. The eleven open content issues in Batch 12 are defects measured against this |
The single most load-bearing sentence across both: business buyers purchase risk reduction, not technology. Copy that reads as clever costs trust here in a way it would not on a developer-facing product.
What belongs here
What it should feel like, and the decisions behind that:
- Product decisions — what the user can do, in what order, and what happens when they get it wrong. The error states are design, not an afterthought.
- UI plans — screens, states, and what each one is for. Include the empty state and the loading state; they are the two most people see first and the two most often left undesigned.
- Copy — the actual words. Interface text is a design surface, and writing it late means writing it badly.
- Tone — how this product talks. One paragraph is enough, and it settles a hundred small arguments.
What does not belong here
- How it is built — that is
docs/architecture/ - Scope and audience — that is
docs/planning/PROJECT_PLAN.md
Include the rejected version
For any decision that was genuinely close, record what was not chosen and why. Without it, the same option gets proposed every few months and re-argued from nothing.