What is the purpose of the case studies?

Case studies translate resume language into architecture, technologies, architecture notes, and reviewer paths.

Do case studies disclose proprietary implementation details?

They describe architecture patterns and public proof surfaces while protecting private code, secrets, and client-confidential details.

What are the case studies for?

Case studies give technical reviewers a direct path from a resume claim to architecture, evidence stage, related Architecture Notes, and implementation context.

How should strategy-backed case studies be read?

Strategy-backed case studies are presented as architecture background material and refined as implementation details are confirmed.

Which case study should an Angular reviewer open first?

The Angular/Python architecture case study and Angular/RxJS architecture page are the best first path for Angular, TypeScript, RxJS, SSR/SSG, hydration, and testing review.

Case Study / Resume Backed Professional Pattern / Enterprise Validated

Enterprise Modernization and Parity Validation

A resume-backed case study for modernizing legacy Web Forms, Classic ASP, and SQL-heavy systems while preserving business behavior through comparison screens, generated scenarios, and test coverage.

Portfolio label: Enterprise Validated Evidence category: legacy-modernization

Problem / constraint

What needed structure

Legacy business systems need modernization while preserving behavior embedded in SQL, forms, and old workflow assumptions.

Legacy risk

What could regress

Modernization must avoid regression in claims, contracts, commissions, logistics, or tax-accounting workflows where behavior matters more than cosmetic rewrites.

Validation method

How the claim is checked

Use behavioral comparison screens, generated scenario tests, automated unit/integration testing, and source review before treating new code as behavior-compatible.

Architecture strategy

How the proof is structured.

Architecture evidence is presented with private implementation details abstracted and explicit not-claimed boundaries.

Capture legacy behavior and SQL-side business rules before changing implementation boundaries. Introduce ASP.NET/Core service seams and testable contracts around modernization work. Use comparison screens, generated scenarios, and reviewer-visible evidence to reduce regression risk. Keep unsupported metrics out of public claims; show validation method and current evidence instead.

Implementation evidence

Info724 resume lines cite comparison screens and test coverage for rebuilt claims-adjudication behavior.
LongTerm Software resume lines cite automated integration testing generated from stored procedures to validate thousands of business scenarios.
Multiple roles cite ASP.NET/Core, C#, Web API, EF Core, ADO.NET, SQL Server, stored procedures, TypeScript, Angular, SOLID, dependency injection, and testing practices.

Result / current status

Resume-backed professional capability pattern summarized for portfolio review; private implementation details are not published.

Technologies

ASP.NET Core C# SQL Server T-SQL stored procedures TypeScript Angular EF Core ADO.NET unit testing integration testing QUnit CI/CD

Technical value

Legacy modernization planning around behavior preservation
SQL-heavy business-rule translation into reviewable architecture
Testing and parity validation as delivery controls
Technical mentoring and maintainable implementation patterns

Not claimed / boundary

No private source code, client data, production metrics, or confidential workflows are exposed.

Related architecture notes

/docs/dotnet-sql-modernization-evidence.md
/docs/resume-source-map.md
/docs/project-evidence-map.md
/docs/source-governance.md

Related AI handoff reference

AI handoff memory package

Related static structured data

/case-studies.json
/evidence-map.json
/route-qa-contract.json

Suggested reviewer path

/dotnet-sql-modernization/
/evidence-map/
/resume/