Make the validation tab two-sided, and stop quoting a ratio as a multiplier - #186
Merged
Conversation
…iplier ## Validation is now two-sided Same scrollytelling layout as the overview, methodology and code tabs: narrative steps left, a sticky panel right that swaps with the step in view, mirrored into meth-inline blocks for the <900px layout where the sticky column is hidden. Five steps, cut at the seams the content already had: 1 How far to trust it - the three configurations 2 Anchored - one test, not two 3 The independent test - HMRC's ready reckoner 4 Free-running - the honest scorecard 5 Known limitations - what it cannot be used for The page was three sections, one of which carried five figures, three tables and a details block under a single heading. Steps 2-4 are that section split at its natural breaks, so the anchored fit, the one independent test and the free-running scorecard each get their own reading position instead of running together. Nothing is rewritten: all five figures, three tables and the details block move across as they are. #trust, #anchored and #caveats stay on the steps, so /obr/validation#caveats (linked from two pages) still resolves. Step/panel sync is the code page's version, which pairs by data-step rather than array position. ## The overview contradicted the validation page The overview said CGIPS moves business investment "-292% of the shock". The validation page says, of that same number, that it "must never be quoted as" a multiplier -- because the response does not scale: -GBP 6.8bn, -GBP 8.8bn, -GBP 11.6bn for shocks of GBP 1.5bn, 3bn and 6bn/quarter. Quadrupling the shock moves the response by under a factor of two, so the percentage is an artefact of the shock size chosen. I introduced that number in #183 and corrected it everywhere except the overview when the non-proportionality turned up. Corrected now: the overview states the property (does not transmit; wrong-signed and non-proportional) rather than a ratio that changes with the input. Site suite 1564 passed; contract and navigation clean. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Lcj9DDqam9KmVCfhEdnJcJ
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Validation is now two-sided
Same scrollytelling layout as the overview, methodology and code tabs: narrative steps left, a sticky panel right that swaps with the step in view, mirrored into
meth-inlineblocks for the <900px layout where the sticky column is hidden.Five steps, cut at the seams the content already had:
The page was three sections, one of which carried five figures, three tables and a details block under a single heading. Steps 2–4 are that section split at its natural breaks, so the anchored fit, the one independent test and the free-running scorecard each get their own reading position instead of running together.
Nothing is rewritten — all five figures, three tables and the details block move across as they are.
#trust,#anchoredand#caveatsstay on the steps, so/obr/validation#caveats(linked from two pages) still resolves. Step/panel sync is the code page's version, which pairs bydata-steprather than array position.The overview contradicted the validation page
The overview said
CGIPSmoves business investment "−292% of the shock". The validation page says of that exact number that it "must never be quoted as" a multiplier — because the response does not scale:Quadrupling the shock moves the response by under a factor of two, so the percentage is an artefact of the shock size chosen.
I introduced that number in #183 and corrected it everywhere except the overview when the non-proportionality turned up. Corrected now: the overview states the property (does not transmit; wrong-signed and non-proportional) rather than a ratio that changes with its input.
Testing
Site suite 1564 passed;
site_contract.pyandsite_nav.pyclean. Structure verified: 5 steps pair 1:1 with 5 panels, div balance 0, oneh1, all figures/tables/details preserved.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01Lcj9DDqam9KmVCfhEdnJcJ