From 3cea6e0ae62facf7d31e7b05f307a75c8e4e5309 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bruno Postle Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2026 23:55:17 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Update CLAUDE.md to reflect the illustrated presentation document The Method, Deliverable, Reference material, and Status sections were written before docs/counter-proposal.md, docs/illustration-prompts.md, and the embedded illustrations existed, and still said image generation was "out of scope" and narratives were the sole deliverable. Brings these sections up to date: we write image prompts and embed externally-generated images, docs/ now holds the public presentation document and its docx export process, and Status reflects the pipeline being complete. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 --- CLAUDE.md | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) diff --git a/CLAUDE.md b/CLAUDE.md index e0eca4a..46cdc75 100644 --- a/CLAUDE.md +++ b/CLAUDE.md @@ -47,8 +47,10 @@ and combine patterns. The paper's workaround: 4. Optionally, the narrative can later be used as a prompt for AI image synthesis to produce illustrative (not prescriptive) visuals — the paper found this reliably reveals human-centered forms even with no style - imposed. **This step is out of scope for us**: image generation will be - done later by others, not as part of this work. + imposed. **We do not run image generation ourselves**, but we do write + the detailed image-generation prompts (see `docs/illustration-prompts.md`) + and embed the resulting images once generated elsewhere (by the user, + via an external tool) into the combined presentation document. The output of the method is words, not drawings — the operational chain is *pattern repository → project-specific pattern subset → LLM narrative @@ -82,9 +84,17 @@ synthesis → evaluation*. ## Deliverable -Written narratives in Markdown. No architectural drawings, plans, or images -are to be produced as part of this work — AI image synthesis from the -narratives is a separate, later step to be done by others. +Two tiers of written output, both in Markdown: + +1. **Working narratives** (`narratives/`) — the four stakeholder + viewpoints, each cross-referencing `ref/` for shared facts and + provenance. This is the drafting-stage material. +2. **Public presentation document** (`docs/counter-proposal.md`) — the + four narratives combined in full under one preamble, for publication. + This is the document actually meant to influence public debate, and the + one illustrated with images. It deliberately does **not** reference + `ref/` source material, pattern numbers, or grammar codes, and does + **not** condense the four narratives — see Status below. **Output format and layout (decided)**: @@ -103,6 +113,20 @@ narratives is a separate, later step to be done by others. - The shared chassis document itself (`ref/project-chassis.md`) is treated as reference material, not a deliverable narrative, and stays in `ref/` alongside the pattern subset and condensed brief it distills. +- `docs/counter-proposal.md` holds the combined public document (see + Status below); `docs/illustration-prompts.md` holds one fully + self-contained AI image-generation prompt per illustration placeholder + (style guide pasted in full into each one, not cross-referenced, so any + single prompt can be copied standalone into an image generator); + `docs/images/` holds the generated illustrations — full-resolution PNGs + in `docs/images/originals/`, and quality-85 JPEG copies at top level + (referenced by `docs/counter-proposal.md`) kept small enough that the + exported `.docx` stays well under typical email attachment limits + (~20 MB for Gmail). `docs/counter-proposal.docx` is generated from the + Markdown via `pandoc docs/counter-proposal.md -o docs/counter-proposal.docx + --standalone --resource-path=docs` for sending directly (e.g. to Nikos to + format/edit) — it is not committed to the repo, since it's a regeneratable + export, not source material. ## Reference material (`ref/`) @@ -122,9 +146,10 @@ narratives is a separate, later step to be done by others. ornamental treatment" part of narrative-writing (per the paper's Section 4.2 approach) grounded in authentic Ecuadorian vernacular character, and for glossary terms (zaguán, corredor, zócalo, alero, etc.) worth reusing - verbatim in our narratives. Its final output-template step ("camera-ready - visual summary" for image generation) is not relevant to us since we are - not producing images. + verbatim in our narratives. Its material/color/ornament vocabulary (CR1, + OP2, OP4, and the E-numbered form elements) also underpins the shared + style guide in `docs/illustration-prompts.md`, translated into plain + descriptive language there rather than cited by code. - `Muna Technical Bases for Stage 1.txt` — the official Stage 1 open call document: scope, site (Av. Eloy Alfaro / Av. de la República, Iñaquito, Quito, 13,004.65 m² plot, min. 25,000 m² building), schedule, selection @@ -152,17 +177,31 @@ narratives is a separate, later step to be done by others. ## Status -Pattern subset and the Ecuadorian Form Language Grammar have been received. -Step 2 (condense the brief) is done: see `ref/brief-condensed.md` (official -brief facts + National Collection detail) and `ref/critique-failures.md` -(named failures mined from the critique transcript, mapped to countering -patterns). Nikos Salingaros has also contributed -`ref/Casa de la Memoria Andina - National Museum Narrative-Kimi.txt`, a -project-data-plus-visitor-narrative document to be reused as much as -possible. Next: extract the shared chassis (`ref/project-chassis.md`) from -that document, reconciling it against the condensed brief, then draft the -four stakeholder narratives into `narratives/` per the Deliverable section -above. +The full pipeline is complete: brief condensed (`ref/brief-condensed.md`), +critique failures mined (`ref/critique-failures.md`), shared chassis +extracted and reconciled (`ref/project-chassis.md`), all four stakeholder +narratives drafted (`narratives/01-visitor.md` through `04-community.md`) +and cross-checked for pattern/brief/grammar fidelity and mutual +consistency. + +Those four narratives have been combined **in full** (not condensed — +repetition across viewpoints describing the same spaces is intentional, +not trimmed for brevity) into the public presentation document +`docs/counter-proposal.md`, stripped of `ref/` citations, pattern numbers, +and grammar codes. 13 illustration prompts were written +(`docs/illustration-prompts.md`), the images generated externally (by the +user, via Midjourney) and downloaded to `docs/images/`, and all 13 are now +embedded in `docs/counter-proposal.md` in place of the illustration +placeholders. `docs/counter-proposal.docx` is the current send-to-Nikos +export (regenerate via the pandoc command in Deliverable above after any +edit to the Markdown or images). + +Open/next: no outstanding pipeline steps — future work is likely editorial +revision based on Nikos's feedback on the docx, or replacing individual +illustrations if a generated image doesn't hold up (e.g. the entrance +portal image shows three arches, not the five bays described in the text — +the text is the design intent and stays as-is; only the image's caption was +adjusted to not assert a bay count).