There are two failure modes in incorporating feedback: fixing only the pointed-out characters and breaking consistency (overfitting), and forgetting previous round decisions and reverting them (regression). This skill prevents both.
Feedback Type Classification Table
| Type | Signal | Change Target | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Concept Direction | "I like/dislike this direction", concept selection | concept.md, concept adoption/discard | font-director |
| Form Rules | "The stroke ends are~", "too angular" | Design language spec → all glyphs | Jamo designers |
| Weight/Contrast | "bold/thin/cramped" | Spec values such as strokeMain | Jamo designers |
| Proportion/Balance | "The final consonant is too big", "the character is tilted" | slots.json slot boxes | composition-engineer |
| Specific Character | "'한' looks strange" | Reduce to a rule after cause analysis | Assign according to cause |
| Legibility | "I can't tell what character it is" | Re-adjust the originality-legibility tradeoff | font-director |
| Letter Spacing/Typesetting | "The spacing is wide" | advance, draft typesetting | font-engineer, specimen-designer |
Processing Procedure
- Preserve Original Text: Record the feedback as a direct quote — the source to return to if the interpretation was wrong
- Two or More Cause Hypotheses: List candidate causes of the surface symptom ("looks bold") (stroke weight? counters? density?). If narrowed to one, write the rationale
- Generalization: Reduce a specific character complaint to the rule level. "한 feels cramped" → "Type 4 final consonant slot height is insufficient" → apply to all of Type 4. Fixing only the pointed-out character is prohibited
- Calculate Impact Scope: List of glyphs to redraw / syllables to recompose due to this change
- Assignment + Priority: high (concept/structure) > mid (spec values) > low (individual corrections)
- Conflict Check: If it contradicts previous round feedback/decisions, do not delete it; list it alongside and classify it as an item for user confirmation
Round File Format
_workspace/feedback/round-{N}.md:
# 라운드 {N} 피드백 — {날짜}
## 원문
> (사용자 피드백 그대로)
## 해석
| # | 피드백 | 유형 | 원인 가설 | 일반화된 변경 스펙 | 영향 범위 | 담당 | 우선순위 |
|---|--------|------|-----------|-------------------|----------|------|---------|
## 사용자 확인 필요
- (모호하거나 상충하는 항목 — 최소 개수로)
## 취향 벡터 (누적)
- (라운드를 거치며 드러난 사용자의 일관된 방향 — 예: "실험성 우선, 본문 가독성은 양보 가능")
Regression Prevention
- At the start of a new round, read all previous
round-*.mdand update the "taste vector" - Check with grep whether a change reverts a previously incorporated item (warn if the same parameter is moved in the opposite direction)
- In the draft, include a "Reflected Feedback" section so that users can directly verify whether it has been reflected