Back to Details

deconstruct

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese
Admiring a finished work teaches nothing; the lessons sit in the choices its maker made and never wrote down. Deconstruct the exemplar to recover those choices, then keep only what is transferable to the user's own work.
Write in the language the user writes in.
仅仅欣赏已完成的作品学不到任何东西；真正的经验藏在创作者做出却未曾记录的选择里。解构范例，还原这些选择，然后只保留那些可迁移到你自身工作中的内容。
使用用户常用的语言进行写作。

1. Take in the exemplar and the goal

1. 接收范例与学习目标

The user supplies two things: the exemplar (a product page, webpage, plan, process doc, dashboard, or other finished work) and what they want to learn from it. If either is missing, ask one question for it and stop.
When the exemplar is a URL, fetch it with 
WebFetch
and work from the fetched page; when the fetch returns nothing usable, ask the user to paste the content and stop.
Hold the learning goal as the filter for every later step: the same page deconstructed for "how it sells" and for "how it organises information" yields different rules.
Done when the full exemplar is in hand and the learning goal is stated in one sentence you can test a rule against.
用户需要提供两项内容：范例（产品页面、网页、方案、流程文档、仪表盘或其他已完成作品），以及他们想要从中学到的内容。若其中任意一项缺失，询问对应的问题后停止操作。
当范例为URL时，使用
WebFetch
获取页面内容并基于该内容开展工作；若获取的内容无法使用，请用户粘贴内容后停止操作。
后续每一步都以学习目标为筛选标准：同一页面，若围绕“如何实现转化”和“如何组织信息”进行解构，会得出不同的规则。
完成标准：已获取完整范例，且学习目标已提炼为可用于验证规则的单句表述。

2. Name the problem it solves

2. 明确它解决的问题

Open with one sentence: what problem this work solves, and for whom. Describe the problem from the audience's side ("lets a first-time visitor decide in thirty seconds whether the tool fits"); "a SaaS landing page" names a category, not a problem.
Done when the sentence names the problem and the person who has it, and contains no feature of the artifact.
以一句话开篇：该作品解决了什么问题，面向哪类人群。从受众的角度描述问题（例如：“让首次访问者在30秒内判断工具是否适合自己”）；“SaaS着陆页”只是类别名称，并非问题描述。
完成标准：句子明确了问题及目标受众，且未提及作品的任何功能。

3. Deconstruct why it works

3. 解构其成功原因

Reverse-engineer the exemplar through four lenses, each backed by something you can point to in the artifact:
  • Who it serves and what its goal is. The specific person in a specific moment, and the single outcome the maker built it to produce. "Users" and "to inform" are placeholders; the real answer says what the maker counts as success.
  • What structure or flow it uses. The order of parts and the reason for the order: what each part sets up for the next, where the audience is taken first and why. Listing the sections is inventory, not structure.
  • Which key choices create the quality gap. Picture the ordinary version of the same thing and name the few choices this maker made differently. A choice earns the list only if removing it would drop the work back to ordinary; praising everything it does well buries the choices that matter.
  • What its completion standard is. What the maker evidently checked before calling it done, inferred from what holds across the whole artifact without exception (every claim has a number, every screen has one action).
Where a lens needs context the artifact does not carry (who made it, what the ordinary version looks like), look it up with 
WebSearch
rather than guess.
Done when each of the four lenses has a finding tied to evidence from the exemplar, and the quality-gap lens names the ordinary version it was measured against.
从四个维度逆向分析范例，每个维度都需结合作品中的具体依据：
  • 服务对象与核心目标：明确特定场景下的具体人群，以及创作者期望达成的单一成果。“用户”和“提供信息”属于模糊表述；真正的答案需说明创作者认定的成功标准。
  • 采用的结构或流程：各部分的顺序及排序原因：每个部分为下一部分做了哪些铺垫，受众首先看到的内容是什么及原因。仅列出章节属于罗列清单，并非结构分析。
  • 关键差异选择：想象同类作品的普通版本，指出创作者做出的少数差异化选择。只有当移除该选择会使作品回归普通水平时，才将其纳入列表；夸赞所有优点会掩盖真正关键的选择。
  • 完成标准：从作品中无例外的共性特征推断创作者在收尾前的检查标准（例如：每项主张都配有数据，每个界面都只有一个核心操作）。
若某个维度需要作品未提供的背景信息（如创作者是谁、普通版本的样子），使用
WebSearch
查询而非猜测。
完成标准：四个维度的分析结论均有范例中的证据支撑，且差异维度明确了用于对比的普通版本。

4. Sort transferable from case-specific

4. 区分可迁移内容与案例专属细节

Sort the findings into patterns that transfer and details that fit only this case. A pattern is transferable when it would still hold with a different audience, medium and subject; a detail is case-specific when it depends on this maker's brand, resources, domain or moment.
Name the case-specific details as fully as the transferable patterns; they tell the user what to leave out of their own version.
Done when every finding from step 3 sits in exactly one of the two piles.
将分析结果分为可迁移模式和仅适用于该案例的细节。当模式在不同受众、媒介和主题下仍成立时，即为可迁移模式；若细节依赖于创作者的品牌、资源、领域或特定场景，则属于案例专属细节。
详细列出案例专属细节，与可迁移模式保持一致的描述粒度；这些细节能告诉用户哪些内容无需应用到自己的作品中。
完成标准：步骤3中的所有分析结果均被归入上述两类中的其中一类，无遗漏。

5. Deliver

5. 输出成果

Deliver in this order: the problem sentence, the deconstruction under its five lenses (four from step 3, the sort from step 4), and then:
  • Reusable rules — three to five, chosen for the user's learning goal, each a transferable pattern phrased as an instruction the user can apply to their own work, with the evidence from the exemplar that backs it.
  • Checklist — the steps the user follows to produce their own version, ordered, each one checkable as done or not, with the completion standard from step 3 as the closing item.
  • First exercise — the one small exercise most worth trying first: bounded to a single sitting, and practising the rule whose absence would cost the user's work the most.
Done when the output runs in that order, the rules number three to five, every checklist item is checkable, and the exercise names one rule and one concrete thing to make.
按以下顺序输出：问题描述句、基于五个维度的解构内容（四个来自步骤3，一个来自步骤4的分类），然后是：
  • 可复用规则：3-5条，结合用户的学习目标选取，每条可迁移模式都表述为用户可应用到自身工作中的指令，并附上范例中的支撑证据。
  • 检查清单：用户制作自己版本时需遵循的步骤，按顺序排列，每个步骤都可明确判断是否完成，以步骤3中的完成标准作为最后一项。
  • 入门练习：最值得优先尝试的小型练习：可在单次任务内完成，针对那些缺失会对用户作品造成最大影响的规则进行练习。
完成标准：输出内容按上述顺序排列，规则数量为3-5条，所有清单项均可验证完成状态，练习明确指出一条规则及一个具体的制作任务。