3.2 KiB
Phase 5: Routing + Route Display - Discussion Log
Audit trail only. Do not use as input to planning, research, or execution agents. Decisions captured in CONTEXT.md — this log preserves the analysis.
Date: 2026-10-24 Phase: 05-routing-route-display Mode: default (interactive)
Areas Discussed
Routing infrastructure — THE PIVOT (the phase's defining decision)
| Question | Options presented | Selection |
|---|---|---|
| VPS for Valhalla? | Oracle Always Free / paid VPS / research decides | User redirected: check the static-hosting/fork-model pivot from phase 3–4 discussions (lunr/Fuse/sql.js WASM, GitHub/CF hosting) |
| Extract | full MY / KL-only | Full Malaysia extract (mooted by pivot) |
| Serving | compose+Caddy+secret / bare systemd / Cloudflare Tunnel | "check planning docs for the pivot to forking model" |
The reconciliation round (user informed of SC3 collision)
Explained: routing ≠ search — per-query shortest-path over multi-million-edge graphs; no Valhalla/OSRM WASM builds exist; static hosts execute nothing; Workers cap at 128MB/CPU-s; third-party APIs leak origin+destination (core-value violation). User then chose:
| Question | Options presented | Selection |
|---|---|---|
| Reconcile SC3 | fixture-now+WASM-later / VPS after all / third-party+exception / something else | Fixture routes now, WASM track later — SC3 amended, no VPS, no proxy |
guidance_sessions envelope
| Question | Options presented | Selection |
|---|---|---|
| Scope at phase close | types-only contract / contract+KV live | Types-only contract |
| Snapshot placement | inline one-TTL / separate key | Inline snapshot, one TTL |
Route UX surface
| Question | Options presented | Selection |
|---|---|---|
| Alternatives presentation | bottom card+chips / stacked cards | Bottom card + chips |
| Route line | orange casing+fit bounds / single line | Orange casing + fit bounds |
| Phase terminal surface | display-only / placeholder start button | Display-only terminal |
Corpus + budgets (fixture-shaped)
| Question | Options presented | Selection |
|---|---|---|
| Fixture geometry source | build-time precompute via public OSRM (no user data) / hand-drawn | Precomputed pairs, build-time |
| Gates | bundle-size + type gates / + fake latency gate | Bundle + type gates |
Corrections Made
User corrected my VPS framing twice — pointing back at their static-hosting/fork-model pivot (stated during phase 4 planning discussions). First round produced the VPS question again; second round produced the SQLite/sql.js question; the routing-area answer finalized as full deferral. The CONTEXT records their intent as the architectural direction (WASM-router track), not a rejection of fork values — the VPS remains a documented backend with provision scripts, just not this phase.
Auto-Resolved
Extract choice (full MY) and serving shape (compose+Caddy) were answered but became moot under the pivot — recorded as part of the documented backend #3 path in deferred ideas.
External Research
Not needed this phase per roadmap ("standard patterns"); the WASM-router feasibility assessment (no Valhalla/OSRM WASM builds; DIY scope) was knowledge-based, verified against the phase-4 research's registry checks.