docHub

Chip system

Three distinct chip types. Confusing them is one of the most common UI mistakes.


TL;DR

TypeLives whereMulti-active?Action
Top-level chip-navTop of workspace/panelYesFilter / activate workspace sections
Sub-chipsInside a cardNo (single-active)Switch the card's view
Sub-navInside a Panel CardYesCreate Inner Cards
Report-Surface chipsInside Full PeekReorderableShow specific surfaces

Confusing them breaks the UI. A "sub-chip" that creates cards is wrong. A "top-level chip" that splits into a card is wrong. Read the rules.


1. Top-level chip-nav

Path in FVS: pact/platform/chip-system/chip-system.md

Rules:

docHub application: docHub's user-face project filter uses this pattern. Chips: getting-started, projects, concepts, reference. Multiple active = filter intersection.


2. Sub-chips

Path in FVS: pact/platform/cards/sub-chip.md

Rules:

docHub application: the report-card inside a decision (e.g., D-060) uses sub-chips to switch between "summary / full text / pact refs." Single-active, never creates new artifacts.


3. Sub-nav

Path in FVS: pact/platform/cards/sub-nav.md

Rules:

docHub application: not used currently. docHub doesn't have Inner Cards; if added, sub-nav would activate them.


4. Report-Surface chips

Path in FVS: pact/platform/cards/report-surface-chips.md

Rules:

docHub application: a Mavis response that contains a docHub lookup uses Report-Surface chips for the response: response (the chat text), data (the bootstrap.json), decisions (cited D-NNNs).


Mavis response chip convention

When the operator asks for "chips in Mavis response," use the sub-chip switcher model — content-type labels (response, data, link, decisions, doc, image), not todo categories.

This is from pact/pipeline/codex/codex-overlays/alignment/overlay-question-index.md and the chip-system pact.


Anti-patterns (from INDEX.md §O)

Full list in doctrine/anti-patterns.md.


← back to Dev docs