Evidence before adjectives.
Haps guides separate general comparison criteria from verified Haps facts. Product and privacy statements are checked against maintained source code, automated tests, contracts, policies, and operational documentation. A reviewer assignment is shown as assigned until the read-through is complete; it is not quietly presented as a finished review.
Haps at a glance
- Publisher
- Srex Digital ApS
- Guide author
- Stig Rex
- Assigned editorial reviewer
- Jesper Rex
- Review status
- Shown per guide as assigned or completed
- Primary evidence
- Maintained implementation, tests, contracts, policies, and first-party documentation
- Evidence boundary
- No competitor, performance, or outcome claim without a disclosed source and method
The source hierarchy
For statements about Haps, the implemented product, automated tests, API contract, maintained privacy policy, and operational documentation take priority over marketing copy. When those sources disagree, publication should pause until the underlying behavior and public wording are reconciled.
For platform standards or general technical guidance, a guide links to the responsible standards body or platform owner where that source is material to the decision. Secondary summaries are not used to upgrade an uncertain claim into a fact.
How comparison and decision guides are prepared
A comparison guide starts with one user decision, such as choosing an input method or checking an export path. It describes observable questions a reader can test rather than declaring one app universally best.
Haps-specific examples are labelled through the surrounding context and checked against current product evidence. Competitor prices, features, availability, ratings, and privacy behavior are excluded unless they have been checked against dated primary sources using a reproducible method.
What the original diagrams show
The diagrams are explanatory models created for these guides. They organise workflows, states, and test questions already described in the text. They are not screenshots, benchmark results, user-research findings, or evidence that every product follows the same flow.
A measured chart belongs on the site only when the sample, collection date, task, device or platform context, exclusions, and calculation method can be published beside it.
Review, corrections, and material changes
A named reviewer is shown as assigned until the planned read-through has happened. After completion, the guide can show a completed review, update its visible review date, and add the reviewer to Article structured data. Assignment alone is not published as an endorsement.
The editorial review covers clarity, coherence, reader usefulness, and inconsistencies noticed during the read-through. Haps-specific product and privacy wording remains tied to maintained evidence; the review is not medical, dietetic, legal, accessibility, security, or independent professional certification.
A material product, privacy, export, deletion, accessibility, platform, or publication-status change triggers a review of affected guides and their sources. Factual corrections can be sent through Haps support; accepted corrections should update the visible review date and the maintained claim record.
What remains deliberately manual
Device testing, screenshot capture, independent specialist review, and search-performance analysis require a real device, qualified external participant, or authenticated property access. Those activities are recorded only after they happen. Planned work is never presented as completed evidence.