It could never score. The schema records VO2max but cannot tell a
measured test apart from a device estimate, so every fitness row reached
the scorer unproven and was refused - the pillar has never produced a
value on any account. Listing it on the score settings page as a thing
you can choose, with a line admitting it does nothing, was chrome over a
switch that changed no number.
So it leaves the catalogue: no pillar id, no domain, no scorer, no row,
no wire field. A stored selection that still names it reads back fine -
the resolver has always filtered stored ids against the catalogue and
drops what it no longer knows, so nobody's saved recipe throws or is
discarded over it.
That also fixes the page claiming unsaved changes forever. The save
stripped the fitness pillar out of the selection on its way to the
server, so the answer that came back could never match the form that
sent it, and 'All pillars' left the save button lit no matter how often
you pressed it.
One boolean on the composite: true when the account's resolved
composition differs from the composition its defaults would resolve to
today, both narrowed by the same modules. Decided once in the score
reader, from the same config and module map the composition came from,
so no client interprets a config blob to answer it.
This is not hasSelection. An account that opened the surface and kept
every pillar has written a selection and is not configured; an account
whose modules alone narrow the set has authored nothing and is not
configured either.
Changing which pillars count is an act the person performed, not
something that happened to their health. Until now the week-over-week
comparison could not tell the difference: both windows are computed in
one request under whatever recipe is in force right now, so the pillar
sets agree, the subtraction looks legitimate, and the dashboard could
announce "your score dropped 14 points" to someone who had just come
back from the settings page.
The recipe now carries its own dated identity, and the delta guard
compares against it the same way it already compares against the global
method boundary: a recipe that changed between the two windows
suppresses the delta with a new reason, config_changed, and the surfaces
that gate on an unexplained delta stay quiet. The score record stores
the recipe version and its change date on every write, resolved from the
same stored blob the composition came from, so a row can say which
recipe produced it. A new series module reads those versions back, marks
the first day after a change as a break, refuses to join the composite
line across it, and keeps the per-pillar rows running through it: a
pillar is graded against its own reference band and stays comparable
when the average of the pillars does not.
The notice key folds the person's recipe version in beside the method
version, so a change in either raises the existing dismissible notice
once and dismissing one never dismisses the other. An account that never
chose keeps its old key untouched.
Until now the set of pillars behind the Health Score was assembled from
the module switches alone, in a stack of ternaries inside the reader. A
person who turned the sleep module off lost the sleep pillar from their
number as a side effect of a setting about recording data, and there was
nowhere else to say what should count.
The reader now reads the stored recipe and narrows it to the pillars a
module is actually recording. The mapping from module to pillar moves
out of the ternaries into a named map beside the reader, where it can be
read and tested. Glycaemia stays fed by either glucose or labs, which
was the one entry a one-module-per-pillar map would have lost.
Nobody's number moves on upgrade. An account that never opened the new
surface resolves to every pillar, and every pillar narrowed by module
availability is exactly the set the ternaries built, so the inheritance
holds by construction with no backfill.
A pillar the recipe selects whose module is off produces no row at all,
rather than a "waiting for data" line. Turning a module off is a
deliberate act, and asking someone for data they chose to stop recording
would be nagging them in the voice of their own settings.
The score is the worse of the systolic and diastolic sub-scores, and
until now nothing said which one it was or how far over its ceiling the
reading sat. The grader now returns that basis together with the score,
as one value, and it is carried as one value all the way to the pillar
so an explanation can never belong to a different grading run than the
number it explains.
Marc-André Bombeck