v1.2 depth expansion

Problem

The v1.0 chart library launched with a curated set of chart types and styling options, but real-world usage data will reveal gaps — chart types that users attempt but don't exist (e.g., waterfall, funnel, heatmap), encoding options that are requested but unsupported, or customization depth that is insufficient for power users. Without expanding the visual language system's depth based on observed usage patterns and retention signals, the library will plateau: users who hit its limits will stop building new dashboards or revert to other tools. Prioritizing expansion by data rather than intuition ensures engineering effort lands on the features that actually drive continued adoption.

Context

• This milestone should deepen visual language, chart defaults, interaction behavior, and differentiated styling based on what users actually needed after the initial launch, not just what sounded interesting during planning.
• Expansion work is most valuable when it builds on stable foundations and clearly improves real workflows instead of reopening unresolved launch-quality debt.
• Expected touchpoints include dataface/core/render/chart/, chart design docs, examples, and visualization test coverage, usage feedback, and any launch metrics or review artifacts that indicate where extra depth would matter most.

Possible Solutions

• A - Add the next roadmap ideas opportunistically: keeps momentum, but it risks building depth in areas users do not care about.
• B - Recommended: expand the highest-value workflows using observed usage and retention signals: keep scope tied to concrete evidence and stable foundations.
• C - Avoid depth work until a larger redesign is planned: safer, but it leaves real user demand unanswered for too long.

Plan

1. Review post-launch usage, support, and feedback to identify where deeper investment in visual language, chart defaults, interaction behavior, and differentiated styling would most improve real workflows.
2. Define a focused expansion scope with explicit non-goals so new depth does not sprawl into adjacent or unproven ideas.
3. Implement or queue the selected enhancements along with the docs, QA, and migration notes needed to make them safe to adopt.
4. Measure whether the added depth changed user outcomes enough to justify further expansion in the same area.

Implementation Progress

Review Feedback

• [ ] Review cleared