Saheb App Design System
1. Purpose of This Documentation
This presentation explains the design and technical decisions behind our application features.
a. I will be covering:
1. Technology Stack
-
Backend framework
-
Web frontend framework
-
Mobile frontend framework
-
Database technology (PostgreSQL, MySQL, etc.)
-
UI libraries
-
Supporting libraries and tools (state management, datafetching, utilities)
2. Application Architecture & Project Structure
-
Backend folder structure
-
Frontend folder structure
-
Design patterns and development strategies
3. Localization & Language Support
-
Multi-language database translation strategy
-
RTL (Right-to-Left) support on web and mobile
-
Hijri calendar localization
4. Core Domain Logic
-
Qibla calculation logic
-
Prayer time calculation methods
-
Hijri time caulculation methods
5. Media Management
-
Audio resource handling (Sermon / موعظة)
-
Video hosting and streaming strategy
6. Notifications & Communication
-
Timezone-aware push notification system
-
Email notification architecture
-
Notification reliability and crash handling
-
Scheduling notificaiton with cron
8. Application Standards
-
Request logging
-
User event and activity tracking
-
Error and crash reporting
-
API versioning
b. How Each Section Is Documented
For every section in this documentation, I consistently answer the following questions:
-
What solution did Ichoose?
-
Why did I choose this solution?
-
What are the pros (optional) and cons of this solution?
-
What alternative approaches I considered?
1. Technology Stack
a. Backend Framework
What solution did I choose?
I chose Nodejs + Expressjs + NestJS as the backend framework.
Why did I choose this solution?
- Team is more experienced with
- Widely used on our code base
-
Built with TypeScript by default
Pros
-
Clear module-based architecture
-
Strong TypeScript support
-
Easy integration with databases, authentication, and queues
-
Express Rich community
-
Supports modular development and scalability
-
Fits well for APIs serving web and mobile apps
-
One backend server for both mobile and web
Cons
-
Slightly more boilerplate
-
Integration Complexity with Some Legacy Libraries
Alternative Approaches
-
Express.js
-
Fastify
-
Laravel (PHP)
-
Spring Boot (Java)
b. Web Frontend Framework
What solution did we choose?
We chose Next.js using the App Directory.
Why did we choose this solution?
-
Built-in support for modern React features
-
File-based routing with the App Directory
-
Good integration with backend APIs
- Built-in layouts, and loading states, server errors handlings
Pros
-
Clear and scalable project structure
-
Server-side rendering and static generation
-
Strong support for SEO and web performance
-
Server Components
Cons
-
Some ecosystem libraries are still adapting
-
Build & Deployment Complexity
-
Rapidly Changing Features
Alternative Approaches
-
React ( Vite )
-
React (Tanstack start )
-
Nuxt.js
-
Angular
c. Mobile Frontend Framework
What solution did we choose?
We chose React Native with Expo.
Why did we choose this solution?
-
Allows building iOS Android apps and web from a single codebase
- Quick testing on simulators, emulators, and real devices
-
Built-in support for push notifications, sensors, and device APIs
-
Large community and ecosystem
- Deployment built-in (EAS Hosting)
- Routing and Authentification built in
- Assets management
- AI intergration (expo mcp server)
Cons
-
Some native modules require custom development (Ejecting from Expo)
Alternative Approaches
-
Pure React Native (without Expo)
-
Flutter
-
Native iOS (Swift) / Android (Kotlin) development
d. Database Technology
What solution did we choose?
We chose PostgreSQL as the database for our application.
Why did we choose this solution?
- Team is more experienced with
- Good ecosystem and tooling support
-
Reliable and stable relational database
-
Widely used in the industry with large community and resources
-
Works well with TypeORM for Nestjs integration
Pros
-
Good ecosystem and tooling support
-
Open-source and actively maintained
-
Supports advanced features like JSON, full-text search, and indexes
-
Strong support for transactions
Cons
-
Can be more complex to set up than simpler databases (like SQLite)
-
Overkill for very small projects
e. UI Libraries
1. Web Frontend UI Approach
What solution did we choose?
We chose shadcn/ui integrated with Tailwind CSS, and Figma designs for reference.
Why did we choose this solution?
- Tailwind provide CSS utility classes to speed up development, so instead of writing custom CSS files, we style components directly using small, reusable classes
- Without Tailwind (Traditional CSS):
- With Tailwind:
- Without Tailwind (Traditional CSS):
-
Provides a ready-to-use component library built on Tailwind CSS
- Open Code: The top layer of your component code is open for modification:
- Other UI libraries:
- Shadcn:
-
import * as React from "react" import { Slot } from "@radix-ui/react-slot" import { cva, type VariantProps } from "class-variance-authority" import { cn } from "@/lib/utils" const buttonVariants = cva( "inline-flex items-center justify-center gap-2 whitespace-nowrap rounded-md text-sm font-medium transition-all disabled:pointer-events-none disabled:opacity-50 [&_svg]:pointer-events-none [&_svg:not([class*='size-'])]:size-4 shrink-0 [&_svg]:shrink-0 outline-none focus-visible:border-ring focus-visible:ring-ring/50 focus-visible:ring-[3px] aria-invalid:ring-destructive/20 dark:aria-invalid:ring-destructive/40 aria-invalid:border-destructive", { variants: { variant: { default: "bg-primary text-primary-foreground hover:bg-primary/90", destructive: "bg-destructive text-white hover:bg-destructive/90 focus-visible:ring-destructive/20 dark:focus-visible:ring-destructive/40 dark:bg-destructive/60", outline: "border bg-background shadow-xs hover:bg-accent hover:text-accent-foreground dark:bg-input/30 dark:border-input dark:hover:bg-input/50", secondary: "bg-secondary text-secondary-foreground hover:bg-secondary/80", ghost: "hover:bg-accent hover:text-accent-foreground dark:hover:bg-accent/50", link: "text-primary underline-offset-4 hover:underline", }, size: { default: "h-9 px-4 py-2 has-[>svg]:px-3", sm: "h-8 rounded-md gap-1.5 px-3 has-[>svg]:px-2.5", lg: "h-10 rounded-md px-6 has-[>svg]:px-4", icon: "size-9", "icon-sm": "size-8", "icon-lg": "size-10", }, }, defaultVariants: { variant: "default", size: "default", }, } ) function Button({ className, variant = "default", size = "default", asChild = false, ...props }: React.ComponentProps<"button"> & VariantProps<typeof buttonVariants> & { asChild?: boolean }) { const Comp = asChild ? Slot : "button" return ( <Comp data-slot="button" data-variant={variant} data-size={size} className={cn(buttonVariants({ variant, size, className }))} {...props} /> ) } export { Button, buttonVariants }
-
- Distribution: A flat-file schema and command-line tool make it easy to distribute components.
-
npx shadcn@latest add button
-
- AI-Ready: Open code for LLMs to read, understand, and improve (mcp server).
-
{ "registries": { "@acme": "https://acme.com/r/{name}.json" } }
-
-
Figma designs give a visual reference for UI consistency
- Huge ecosystem built around shadcn.
-
Fits well with React and Next.js
- Very customizable :
- you can change the whole app theme by changing only globall.css file :
- change component source code.
Pros
-
Lightweight and modern styling approach
Cons
-
Learning curve for Tailwind if new to utility-first CSS
Alternative Approaches
-
Material-UI (MUI)
-
Ant Design
-
Chakra UI
-
Custom components from scratch
1. Mobile UI Approach:
What solution did I choose?
I chose not to use any mobile component library.
I use NativeWind for styling, along with Figma MCP, Figma Make, and Figma Dev Tools.
Why did I choose this solution?The app uses a fully custom UI designed in Figma, so prebuilt component libraries are not a good fit
-
NativeWind works like Tailwind CSS, making styling simple and consistent
-
Utility-based styling works well with LLMs for generating and adjusting UI code
-
Figma MCP and Figma Make help convert design decisions into implementation guidance
-
Figma Dev Tools allow developers and LLMs to inspect spacing, colors, and layout accurately


