Diffraction glossary

Three terms we use on purpose: UI review and product experience review name the practice; aberration names a verified finding. Diffraction is not “visual testing” and not a source‑only PR bot. Longer reads: What is UI review? and UI review vs visual testing.

Aberration: An aberration is a verified product‑experience failure found while reviewing a running UI, backed by evidence a reviewer can replay or inspect.

In Diffraction language, aberrations are the unit of finding for UI review: concrete, evidenced, and tied to what a user would hit after a change. Not a raw pixel delta. Not an unconfirmed guess from reading source alone.

See also: UI review, product experience review, cautionary tales.

UI review: UI review is the practice of evaluating a UI‑affecting change by experiencing the running product, especially on GitHub PRs for web apps, rather than by source reading or screenshot comparison alone.

UI review asks whether the product still works as a product: flows, defaults, states, and outcomes. Diffraction's category is UI review. Full explainer: What is UI review?.

Product experience review: Product experience review is UI review framed around whether real user journeys still succeed after a change: from first intent through completion, including errors and edge states.

Same practice as UI review; different emphasis for eng leads who care about shipping outcomes, not only component snapshots. Compare adjacent categories: UI review vs visual testing.

• Practice: UI review / product experience review
• Finding: aberration
• Wedge: UI‑affecting GitHub PRs on web apps
• Tagline: See the full spectrum of every diff.

Thesis we keep returning to: source correctness ≠ product correctness. Role-specific framing: UI review for your role. Three stories: checkboxes, six enrolments, the button.

Diffraction is building toward agent‑driven UI review designed to return verified aberrations with evidence when live. Explore our projects on GitHub or email hello@diffraction.sh.