# C04 → C05 — Choose, then Detail The Hamilton and Alexandra College · Year 12 · 2026 C04 and C05 sit back-to-back in the SAT and share the word *design*, so they're easy to blur. The distinction is simple once you see it: **C04 decides *which* idea; C05 specifies that idea precisely enough to build.** --- ## The one-sentence rule | Criterion | In one sentence | The question it answers | |---|---|---| | **C04** — Generating Design Ideas & Evaluation Criteria | Explore *several* rough design ideas, then use evaluation criteria to choose one | "Which design should proceed — and why?" | | **C05** — Producing Detailed Designs | Take the *chosen* idea and detail it until someone else could build it | "Exactly how is this built — every screen, field and step?" | The shift is **breadth → depth**: C04 is *divergent* (many options, then a decision); C05 is *convergent* (one option, fully specified). --- ## One picture C04 fans *out* into options and funnels *in* to a decision. C05 takes that single decision and fans it back *out* — but this time into detail, not alternatives. ```mermaid flowchart LR I1["Idea A"] --> M{{"Evaluation matrix<br/>C04 · choose which"}} I2["Idea B"] --> M I3["Idea C"] --> M M ==>|"the chosen design"| D["Detailed design<br/>C05"] D --> T1["Mock-ups"] D --> T2["Data dictionary"] D --> T3["IPO charts"] D --> T4["Pseudocode"] D --> T5["Object descriptions"] ``` --- ## Side-by-side | | **C04** | **C05** | |---|---|---| | What you produce | Several rough ideas + an evaluation matrix | One detailed design of the chosen idea | | Mindset | Explore, then **decide** | Commit, then **detail** | | Key tools | Mood board, brainstorm, mind map, annotated sketches | Mock-ups, data dictionary, IPO charts, pseudocode, object descriptions | | Output's job | **Justify a choice** | **Be buildable** | | Leans on | Your SRS (C03) and design brief | Your C04 decision | --- ## The trap C05 is **not** "make the C04 sketch look nicer." A rough idea becomes a *detailed design* when another person could build from it **without asking you what you meant** — exact data types in the data dictionary, real logic in the pseudocode, every control annotated on the mock-up. That buildable precision is the whole point of C05. > [!TIP] > **Architect's analogy:** C04 is sketching three concepts and arguing for one. C05 is drawing the construction blueprints for the concept that won. You can't blueprint what you haven't chosen — so C05 depends on the C04 decision. --- ## Check Your Understanding 1. In one phrase, what does C04 decide that C05 then assumes? >| *Which* design idea proceeds. C05 details that already-chosen idea — it doesn't re-open the choice. 2. Breadth or depth — which word fits C04, and which fits C05? >| C04 = **breadth** (several ideas, then choose). C05 = **depth** (one idea, fully specified). 3. A student repolishes the colours and fonts of their C04 sketch and submits it as their detailed design. What's missing? >| Buildable detail — data dictionary, IPO/pseudocode logic, annotated controls. "Looks nicer" is not "detailed enough for someone else to build." --- ## See also - [Efficiency vs Effectiveness](/sd/C04/Efficiency%20vs%20Effectiveness) — the key distinction *inside* C04's evaluation criteria - [Design Principles vs UX Characteristics](/sd/C05/Design%20Principles%20vs%20UX%20Characteristics) — a distinction *inside* C05 --- ← [C04 Home](/sd/C04/C04-home) · [C05 Home](/sd/C05/C05-home) · [VCE Software Development Hub](/sd/VCE%20Software%20Development%20Hub)