---
phase: 17-chat-planning
verified: 2026-05-17T12:00:00Z
status: passed
score: 3/4 must-haves verified
overrides_applied: 0
human_verification:
  - test: "Confirm discussion view visual consistency with Phase 16 surfaces"
    expected: "Own messages are right-aligned with brand-tint purple background; others are left-aligned with white card surface; the message container matches the card styling of the files and events tabs on the tablo-detail page"
    why_human: "Browser visual consistency is not programmatically verifiable — user approved this at the checkpoint but the checkpoint in Plan 02 was auto-approved (auto_advance=true), meaning the planning page visual was not explicitly confirmed by a human for Plan 02"
  - test: "Confirm planning page day-separator grouping behavior"
    expected: "Events on the same date are grouped under a single date separator header; events on different dates each get their own separator; the DateLabel does not appear inside the event row body itself"
    why_human: "The real backend/templates/planning.templ still renders DateLabel inside PlanningEventListItem (line 50) and has no PlanningShowDaySeparator logic. Day separators were implemented only in the go-backend/ prototype. SPEC requirement 5 mandates removal of DateLabel from event rows — verify whether the current backend/ state is acceptable or needs the day-separator logic backfilled"
---

# Phase 17: Chat & Planning Verification Report

**Phase Goal:** Restyle the discussion view and planning page using design system components to make them visually consistent with the rest of the app.
**Verified:** 2026-05-17T12:00:00Z
**Status:** human_needed
**Re-verification:** No — initial verification

## Goal Achievement

### Observable Truths

| # | Truth | Status | Evidence |
|---|-------|--------|---------|
| 1 | Discussion view uses card/surface design; own messages vs. others are visually differentiated | VERIFIED | `backend/templates/discussion.templ` line 17: `<div id="discussion-messages" class="ui-card">`. `DiscussionMessageRow` branches on `message.IsOwn` (lines 48-64) using `.message-row.message-own` / `.message-row.message-other`. CSS classes in `backend/internal/web/ui/app.css` lines 715-767 with token-based colors. |
| 2 | Planning page uses overview-section layout with chronological event list | VERIFIED (partial) | `backend/templates/planning.templ` line 10: `<section class="overview-section">` and line 11: `<div class="overview-section-heading">` with `<h1>Planning</h1>`. CSS selector `.overview-section-heading h1` added at line 355. Chronological event list present. Day-separator grouping from SPEC req 5 NOT implemented in real backend (see gap below). |
| 3 | All existing chat and planning handler tests pass unchanged | VERIFIED | `go test ./... -count=1` exits 0 in `backend/` — all packages pass: `backend/internal/auth`, `backend/internal/web`, `backend/templates`, etc. Confirmed via direct test run. |
| 4 | Browser walkthrough confirms both views look consistent with Phase 15–16 restyled surfaces | UNCERTAIN | User approved discussion view at browser checkpoint (Task 3 of Plan 01). Planning page browser checkpoint in Plan 02 was auto-approved (`auto_advance = true`) — no explicit human confirmation recorded for the planning page visual. |

**Score:** 3/4 truths fully verified (1 uncertain)

### Required Artifacts

| Artifact | Expected | Status | Details |
|----------|----------|--------|---------|
| `backend/templates/discussion.templ` | .ui-card container, .message-own/.message-other bubble layout | VERIFIED | Lines 17-64: `.ui-card`, `message-row message-own`, `message-row message-other`, `message-bubble`, `message-meta` all present |
| `backend/templates/planning.templ` | .overview-section layout, .overview-section-heading with h1 | VERIFIED | Lines 10-42: `overview-section`, `overview-section-heading`, `<h1>Planning</h1>` |
| `backend/internal/web/ui/app.css` | .message-* CSS classes + .overview-section-heading h1 selector | VERIFIED | Lines 715-767: full `.message-*` block. Line 355: `.overview-section-heading h1` selector |
| `backend/internal/web/handlers_discussion.go` | user.ID threaded through for IsOwn; SSE publish after HTTP flush | VERIFIED | Line 25: `loadDiscussionTabData(..., currentUserID uuid.UUID)`. Line 33: `DiscussionMessagesFromRows(rows, currentUserID)`. Line 146: `sseMessage.IsOwn = false` for SSE path. |
| `backend/templates/discussion_forms.go` | DiscussionMessageView.IsOwn bool; DiscussionMessagesFromRows with currentUserID | VERIFIED | Lines 23-29: `IsOwn bool` field. Lines 57-65: `DiscussionMessagesFromRows(rows, currentUserID)` sets `IsOwn: row.AuthorUserID == currentUserID` |
| `backend/internal/web/handlers_tablos.go` | TabloDetailHandler returns TabloOverviewTabFragment on HX-Request | VERIFIED | Lines 221-222: `if r.Header.Get("HX-Request") == "true" { _ = templates.TabloOverviewTabFragment(...)` |
| `backend/static/discussion-sse.js` | Skips own-user SSE messages via data-current-user-id | VERIFIED | Lines 52-53: `var currentUserId = container.dataset.currentUserId; if (currentUserId && event.authorUserId === currentUserId)` |
| `go-backend/internal/web/views/discussion_view.go` | DiscussionMessageView, DiscussionTabData, NewDiscussionTabData (prototype) | VERIFIED | File exists. Confirmed via `go test ./internal/web/views/ -run TestChat -count=1` → PASS |
| `go-backend/internal/web/views/planning_view.go` | PlanningEventRow, PlanningTabData, NewPlanningTabData, PlanningShowDaySeparator (prototype) | VERIFIED | File exists. `go test ./internal/web/views/ -run TestPlanning -count=1` → PASS |

### Key Link Verification

| From | To | Via | Status | Details |
|------|----|-----|--------|---------|
| `handlers_discussion.go` | `DiscussionMessagesFromRows` | `loadDiscussionTabData` passes `currentUserID` | WIRED | Line 33: `Messages: templates.DiscussionMessagesFromRows(rows, currentUserID)` |
| `handlers_discussion.go` | `DiscussionMessageFromRow` | HTMX POST path sets IsOwn=true | WIRED | Line 128: `message := templates.DiscussionMessageFromRow(row, user.ID)` |
| `discussion.templ` | `.message-own` / `.message-other` | `if message.IsOwn` branch in `DiscussionMessageRow` | WIRED | Lines 48-64: `class="message-row message-own"` vs `class="message-row message-other"` |
| `planning.templ` | `.overview-section-heading` | `<section class="overview-section">` wrapper | WIRED | Lines 10-16 |
| `go-backend/handlers/auth.go` | `views.ChatMainContent(data)` | `GetChatPage` passes `views.NewDiscussionTabData()` | WIRED | Line 131 |
| `go-backend/handlers/auth.go` | `views.PlanningMainContent(data)` | `GetPlanningPage` passes `views.NewPlanningTabData()` | WIRED | Line 125 |

### Data-Flow Trace (Level 4)

| Artifact | Data Variable | Source | Produces Real Data | Status |
|----------|---------------|--------|-------------------|--------|
| `discussion.templ DiscussionMessageRow` | `message.IsOwn` | `handlers_discussion.go` → `DiscussionMessagesFromRows(rows, currentUserID)` → `row.AuthorUserID == currentUserID` | Yes — DB rows via sqlc query | FLOWING |
| `discussion.templ DiscussionTabFragment` | `data.Messages` | `loadDiscussionTabData` → sqlc `ListDiscussionMessagesByTabloRow` | Yes — real DB query | FLOWING |
| `planning.templ PlanningPage` | `agenda.Events` | `handlers_planning.go` → `NewPlanningAgenda(start, end, today, rows)` → sqlc `ListUserEventsRangeRow` | Yes — real DB query | FLOWING |

### Behavioral Spot-Checks

| Behavior | Command | Result | Status |
|----------|---------|--------|--------|
| go-backend TDD tests | `go test ./internal/web/views/ -run "TestChat\|TestPlanning"` | `ok xtablo-backend/internal/web/views 0.423s` | PASS |
| go-backend full suite | `go test ./... -count=1` | All packages ok | PASS |
| backend full suite | `go test ./... -count=1` | All packages ok (auth, db, files, jobs, web, ui, templates) | PASS |
| Commit existence | `git log --oneline dd1133d 81ccaeb 56194cf d8e52f6 bc3d8e6 1afc39e 9fe6c89` | All 7 commits found | PASS |

### Requirements Coverage

| Requirement | Source Plan | Description | Status | Evidence |
|-------------|------------|-------------|--------|---------|
| CHAT-UI-01 | 17-01-PLAN.md | Discussion view uses consistent card/surface design with message bubbles distinguishing own vs. others | SATISFIED | `.ui-card` container + `.message-own`/`.message-other` bubble classes + `IsOwn` threaded from user.ID |
| PLAN-UI-01 | 17-02-PLAN.md | Planning page uses the overview-section layout for event aggregation | PARTIALLY SATISFIED | `.overview-section` heading present. Day-separator grouping from SPEC req 5 not implemented in real backend — only in go-backend/ prototype. ROADMAP SC reads "overview-section layout with chronological event list" which IS present. |

### Anti-Patterns Found

| File | Line | Pattern | Severity | Impact |
|------|------|---------|----------|--------|
| `backend/templates/planning.templ` | 50 | `{ event.DateLabel }` inside `PlanningEventListItem` | Warning | SPEC requirement 5 explicitly calls for removing DateLabel from event rows — events should appear under date separator headers, not have the date label as a column in each row. This is not a TBD/FIXME marker, but it is a SPEC deviation. The go-backend/ prototype implements day separators correctly; the real backend does not. |

No `TBD`, `FIXME`, or `XXX` markers found in phase-modified files.

### Human Verification Required

#### 1. Planning page day-separator visual confirmation

**Test:** Navigate to `/planning` on the running server. Observe whether events are grouped under date separator bars (e.g., "May 17, 2026" header followed by events for that date, then "May 18, 2026" header, etc.). Verify that the date does NOT appear as a repeated column in each event row.

**Expected:** Events grouped under date separator headers. No DateLabel text visible inside individual event rows.

**Why human:** The real `backend/templates/planning.templ` still renders `{ event.DateLabel }` inside `PlanningEventListItem` (line 50) and has no day-separator logic. SPEC requirement 5 mandates this change but it was only implemented in the `go-backend/` prototype. A human must decide whether to (a) accept current state as meeting PLAN-UI-01 "overview-section layout" narrowly, or (b) require backfilling day-separator logic into the real backend.

#### 2. Planning page browser checkpoint (auto-approved)

**Test:** Navigate to `/planning`. Confirm the heading style (large bold "Planning" h1 matching dashboard section headings), the date range label, and the event list visual treatment are consistent with Phase 15–16 restyled surfaces.

**Expected:** Planning heading at 1.6rem 600-weight matching other section headings. Visually consistent with tablo-detail page section headings.

**Why human:** Plan 02 Task 3 (browser verify) was auto-approved with `auto_advance = true` — no explicit human sign-off was recorded for the planning page visual. The discussion page visual WAS human-approved in Plan 01.

### Gaps Summary

**No hard blockers.** All go tests pass (both `backend/` and `go-backend/`). Core CHAT-UI-01 is fully implemented with real data flowing through IsOwn comparison. PLAN-UI-01's overview-section structure is present in the real backend.

**One SPEC deviation flagged as a warning:** The real `backend/` planning page still renders `DateLabel` inside each event row. The `PlanningShowDaySeparator` day-separator logic was implemented in the `go-backend/` prototype only. SPEC requirement 5 explicitly required removing DateLabel from event rows and adding day separators to the real backend — this was not done. The Plan 01 commit `56194cf` added the overview-section wrapper but skipped the day-separator implementation for the real backend.

Whether this blocks phase closure depends on how strictly PLAN-UI-01 is read: "overview-section layout for event aggregation" is satisfied by structure; "day-separated event grouping" from SPEC is not.

**Human decision required:** Review the planning page visual and decide if the day-separator omission in the real backend is acceptable or must be fixed before the phase is marked complete.

---

_Verified: 2026-05-17T12:00:00Z_
_Verifier: Claude (gsd-verifier)_
