Phase 5 — how should a churny shift be drawn?

Same real prod day (2026‑06‑04, ), rendered three ways on normalized spans. Pick the rendering philosophy; layout / drill‑down / live all follow from it. Times in America/Chicago — business timezone is itself a design decision.

READY (idle / waiting)
IN_CALL (on a dial)
IN_ACW (after‑call work)
OFFLINE / gap

A True‑to‑scale + zoom

Every span proportional to real elapsed time. Honest. Dense flip‑stretches collapse into near‑solid bands — you’d zoom into a window to read individual transitions.

Good

  • Never lies about time
  • Solid block = genuinely sustained state
  • Gaps / OFFLINE jump out

Bad

  • Individual flips invisible without zoom
  • Needs a zoom/pan interaction

B Utilization buckets (adherence strip)

Slice the shift into 10‑min buckets; each shows the share of time per state (gaps stay empty). Reads like a call‑center occupancy strip. Whole shift legible at a glance; trades away transition detail.

Good

  • Whole shift legible, zero zoom
  • “How occupied, when” instantly
  • Comparable agent‑to‑agent

Bad

  • Hides exact transition sequence
  • “When was call X” needs drill‑down

C Min‑width segments (every flip visible)

Draw every span but force a min width so 2‑second flips stay clickable. Time axis goes non‑linear (distorts duration). Surfaces transition count/sequence.

Good

  • Every transition visible + hoverable
  • Churn is obvious

Bad

  • Lies about duration
  • No real time axis
My lean: B as the default overview (legible whole‑shift, comparable across agents), with A as a “zoom to raw” drill for exact transitions. C is a niche debug view — probably YAGNI.
Reply in the terminal: which is the primary view — A, B, C, or a combo? And does “zoom to raw” as a drill feel necessary or like scope creep?