Skip to content
How much to read

Knowledge base

projects / easemysemester / features

Bank browse: subject to chapter to question list

v2's subject to chapter to question list navigation was already built by the styling pass, verified against production data, with a chapter-count line-wrap defect fixed.

feature · current · updated 2026-09-15 · EaseMySemester case study

See overview and ranked topics view, the sibling screen this navigation leads into.

What it does

Subject list to chapter list (/subjects/[id]) to question list (/subjects/[id]/[chapterId], with an answer-status badge and occurrence counts) to answer, one click away. The scope also asked for a ranked-topics view, which already existed as its own screen (see ranked topics view).

The sizing problem

Chapters range from 4 to 66 questions, averaging 26. A layout that renders both identically reads as broken at either extreme, so the design brief was to hold at both ends rather than tune for the average.

What review found

The scope was met by existing screens rather than requiring new ones. One line needed an explicit ruling: "question list with appearance history and likelihood." Recurrence is shown as occurrence counts and the most recent sitting. Likelihood is deliberately not shown, per the no-probability rule already locked in #21 (details): 720 of 809 questions have appeared once, so a per-question likelihood would be a prediction dressed as a fact.

Verified at 375x812 against production data: ten chapter rows render with the count on one line on every row, including the corpus's longest chapter name ("Central Nervous System (CNS) & Special Senses, 66 questions"), with no horizontal overflow. A count-wrap defect was fixed and pinned by a test that fails if whitespace-nowrap is removed from the row.

Status

Verified and closed 2026-09-09. No density switch exists between a 4-question and a 66-question chapter; the current row layout holds at both extremes without one.

This page was written by a model from my own repositories and checked by a second one against the same sources. I did not write it, and no version of it was approved by me before it went up. How that works, and where it can still be wrong.