FDE demo

Comparison

What changed between the fair Blueprint baseline and the UX pack-guided revision.

The baseline proves a fast Blueprint build can reach credible working software. The critique and audit found review-risk, edit-state, accessibility, and responsive issues. The pack-guided version makes review risk actionable, edits safer, and state meaning clearer while keeping Blueprint as the component foundation.

Before And After

The comparison is about product clarity and system behavior, not making Blueprint look bad.

Blueprint baseline

  • Credible compact workbench with real Blueprint components.
  • Summary tiles, Analysis/Detail tabs, drilldowns, edit/add/delete/exclude, and CSV simulation work.
  • Review issues exist, but the screen is quiet about what to fix first.
  • Edit/save, status labels, filter scope, and 390px action visibility need hardening.
  • Good baseline for the experiment because it is credible, not artificially weak.

Pack-guided revision

  • First viewport names active issue flags and routes to scoped Detail rows.
  • Review state is re-derived on edit, add, save, and restore.
  • Rollups and Detail rows show stronger review-state pills and issue labels.
  • Review status, active scope, column filters, and row counts use one visible grammar.
  • Save, restore, add, and download provide local-state feedback when review items remain.

Small Caveat

Loading and fixture states are still demo-scale, not a production QA harness. The route focuses on making the before/after design and system delta legible for review.

Open baselineOpen pack-guidedCritic reportAudit report