Question
Does the Overlay survive project scale, and at what cost?
The Overlay is a hand-rolled UI in a single file with no framework. Release 0.8.0 was spent almost entirely on its footprint and reachability: it still takes roughly 26% of a 1280px window once something is selected and roughly 61% of a 360px one, Peek exists because the chrome takes the page's clicks, and below 520px the properties panel becomes a bottom sheet. CONTEXT.md also records three JS-to-CSS layout channels that exist because CSS cannot ask "how tall did that render" or "did that wrap".
Project scope adds a project picker, a file tree and page navigation. That is a different quantity of UI on top of a surface that is already fighting for room.
Resolve:
- Whether project-level UI lives inside the Overlay or beside it - a separate chrome that owns the project and hands one page at a time to the existing Overlay. The second is likely cheaper and keeps 0.8.0's footprint work intact.
- Whether the Overlay gets rebuilt, extended, or left alone.
- Whether a UI framework enters the project, and how that interacts with the zero-dependency decision being resolved for the writer. Answering these two independently is how a codebase ends up with one vendored dependency and one npm dependency for no stated reason.
- What happens to
Peek, the three measured layout channels, and the bottom-sheet breakpoint if the chrome changes shape.
A rough prototype is likely worth more here than argument - the question is "how should it look and behave", which is what makes this a prototype ticket rather than a grilling one.
Blocked on the Project definition, since there is nothing to browse until Project means something.
Question
Does the Overlay survive project scale, and at what cost?
The Overlay is a hand-rolled UI in a single file with no framework. Release 0.8.0 was spent almost entirely on its footprint and reachability: it still takes roughly 26% of a 1280px window once something is selected and roughly 61% of a 360px one,
Peekexists because the chrome takes the page's clicks, and below 520px the properties panel becomes a bottom sheet.CONTEXT.mdalso records three JS-to-CSS layout channels that exist because CSS cannot ask "how tall did that render" or "did that wrap".Project scope adds a project picker, a file tree and page navigation. That is a different quantity of UI on top of a surface that is already fighting for room.
Resolve:
Peek, the three measured layout channels, and the bottom-sheet breakpoint if the chrome changes shape.A rough prototype is likely worth more here than argument - the question is "how should it look and behave", which is what makes this a prototype ticket rather than a grilling one.
Blocked on the Project definition, since there is nothing to browse until Project means something.