{{ invitationSentence }}
{{ invitationSentence }}
| Field | Value | Guest note | Copy |
|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.field }} | {{ row.value }} | {{ row.note }} |
| Artifact | Text | Copy |
|---|---|---|
| {{ row.artifact }} | {{ row.text }} |
| Check | Status | Action | Copy |
|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.check }} | {{ row.status }} | {{ row.action }} |
| Proof item | Current value | Follow-up | Copy |
|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.item }} | {{ row.value }} | {{ row.followUp }} |
A wedding invitation carries the facts guests use to decide where to be, when to arrive, how formal the celebration feels, and how to respond. It names the host or sets the opening tone, identifies the couple, states the ceremony or reception, gives the date, time, and venue, and points guests toward an RSVP method. When one of those details is vague, people start guessing about arrival time, dress, travel, companions, or whether the reply deadline is firm.
Wording choices signal formality before guests read the venue line. A ceremony in a house of worship may call for traditional phrasing, while a reception-only gathering, destination celebration, or phone-first announcement can use warmer and shorter language. The essential information stays the same, but the order, tone, and amount of detail should match how guests will actually receive the card.
Printed and digital invitations fail in different ways. Print problems often involve paper size, envelope fit, unreadable small type, postage, or a QR code that looked clear on screen but will not scan from the final stock. Digital problems usually come from long wording, stale links, screenshots that crop the RSVP line, or guests forwarding a card without the supporting context. A good invitation plan treats the card face, reply method, and final proof as connected parts of one guest handoff.
The safest card keeps private planning elsewhere. Registry details, hotel blocks, meal choices, family notes, and child or companion rules usually need a wedding site, enclosure, or direct message. The card itself should carry the facts every invited guest needs before responding, then make the next action obvious without exposing guest-specific details.
Start with the event facts, then proof the visual card, RSVP handoff, and share output after the wording stops changing.
The card preview is the visible draft, but the proof tables tell you whether the draft is ready to leave your browser. Check the preview for tone and spacing, then use the checklist and production proof to catch missing event facts, mismatched format choices, long text, stale share links, and weak RSVP handoff before exporting artwork.
| Result cue | What it means | What to check next |
|---|---|---|
| Ready to share | Most checklist rows are ready and the current card is close to final. | Scan the RSVP QR, proof spelling, and test the PNG or PDF at the final size. |
| Needs review | One or more rows need attention, often text fit, delivery target, RSVP payload, or deadline. | Open Print Checklist and fix the first Review row before exporting. |
| Draft only | Core invitation facts are missing or too many checks are unresolved. | Complete names, date, time, venue, address, and RSVP details before sending a link. |
| No scannable payload | The selected RSVP method does not have a usable website, email, or phone action. | Fix the RSVP value or turn off RSVP QR if guests will respond another way. |
| Link draft | The card-only link is missing or no longer matches the edited fields. | Create a fresh signed link and open it in a separate tab before sharing. |
A ready badge does not confirm envelope size, postage, printer trimming, guest-list accuracy, venue accessibility, meal deadlines, or whether every guest can use a QR code. Treat the result as a polished invitation draft and run one final human proof against the actual delivery plan.
Invitation design is an information hierarchy before it is a visual style choice. Names, host wording, event type, date, time, venue, address, RSVP line, and deadline compete for limited space. The card format sets the available shape, while the delivery target changes what must be proved: a printed suite needs physical-mail checks, a digital link needs a clean guest path, and a phone story needs tall-screen readability.
QR codes add a machine-readable action to the guest handoff. They can open a website, prepare an email draft, or start a phone action when the entered RSVP value is valid. They do not collect replies by themselves, and they do not prove that the destination is safe or final. The visible RSVP line, the signed card link, and a real-device scan test all remain part of the proof.
The readiness badge is calculated from the nine checklist rows that currently pass.
A score of 90 or higher displays Ready to share. Scores from 70 through 89 display Needs review, and lower scores display Draft only. For example, eight ready rows out of nine produce an 89 score after rounding, so the invitation still needs review.
| Card format | PDF page size | Best use | Review risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Portrait 5 x 7 | 127 mm x 177.8 mm | Classic printed invitation cards and hybrid delivery. | Envelope, paper thickness, and postage still need separate proofing. |
| Square 5 x 5 | 127 mm x 127 mm | Square print stock and compact social previews. | Square mailpieces can fall outside normal letter-machine aspect ratios. |
| Landscape 7 x 5 | 177.8 mm x 127 mm | Wide names, venue lines, and horizontal image sharing. | Long address and RSVP text can spread too far across the card. |
| Digital story 9 x 16 | 101.25 mm x 180 mm | Phone stories, chats, and tall-screen previews. | Long names and long words need stricter proofing on narrow screens. |
| RSVP method | Guest-facing line | QR behavior | Review cue |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wedding website link | Asks guests to respond at the entered web address. | Opens the normalized website address when the link can be read. | A warning appears when the value is not a valid domain or secure link. |
| Email address | Asks guests to respond to the entered mailbox. | Prepares a mail draft with a wedding RSVP subject and response template. | A warning appears when the email address format is invalid. |
| Phone or WhatsApp number | Asks guests to respond at the entered number. | Creates a phone handoff when enough digits are present. | A warning appears when the number is too short for a phone action. |
| No RSVP line | Removes the RSVP line from the card. | No QR appears because there is no scannable reply action. | Use only when another card, website, or private message handles replies. |
| Check | Trigger | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Couple names | More than 58 characters | Long display names can shrink or wrap in ways that weaken the card headline. |
| Venue name | More than 70 characters | Extra location wording usually belongs in the details note or wedding site. |
| Details note | More than 150 characters | The card face should carry one compact note, not a full travel or registry block. |
| RSVP line | More than 125 characters | Long links and reply instructions can crowd the lower part of the card. |
| Delivery target | Format mismatch | Story sharing expects 9 x 16, while printed or hybrid delivery expects a print-friendly format. |
The wording artifacts come from the same card facts. Full card wording mirrors the preview, SMS or WhatsApp text compresses the invitation into a short guest message, and Email body expands the same facts into a note. Comparing those artifacts catches a common production mistake: one channel showing a newer time, venue, or reply instruction than another.
The generator helps draft and proof invitation artwork in the browser. It does not replace a stationer, print vendor, postal clerk, wedding planner, or etiquette review for sensitive family wording.
A couple enters Sarah & Michael, keeps Portrait 5 x 7, chooses a June ceremony date at 4:00 PM, and adds The Willow Gardens with a concise street address. With a valid wedding website link and an RSVP deadline, RSVP Details shows a guest-facing RSVP line and a usable QR payload. If the checklist rows are ready, the summary can move to Ready to share.
A destination celebration uses Digital story 9 x 16, a short details note, and Destination celebration wording. When the delivery target is Phone story, the format matches the share plan. If the couple name or details note grows too long, Text fit changes to Review, so the better fix is shorter display wording rather than more text on the card.
An invitation with RSVP method set to email can preview normally even when the mailbox is mistyped. The warning area reports that the email address is not valid yet, and RSVP Details cannot provide a reliable QR payload. After correcting the address, scan the QR and confirm the draft opens with the expected wedding RSVP subject.
A planner copies a signed card-only link, then changes the venue address and RSVP deadline. The share strip reports that fields changed after the link was created. The old link still represents the older details, so the planner should copy a fresh link and use Open to proof the card-only view before sending it.
Open Print Checklist and look for rows marked Review. Common causes are missing event facts, an RSVP method without a usable value, no reply deadline, delivery target mismatch, or text that is too long for the chosen format.
The QR can open the selected website, email draft, or phone action when RSVP QR is on and the selected RSVP value is valid. It does not collect, store, or count guest responses inside this page.
Use PDF for print proofing because it follows the selected card format size. Use PNG for image sharing, HTML for a standalone card handoff, and JSON to save or audit the current settings.
The QR appears only when RSVP QR is on, the RSVP method is not No RSVP line, and the entered website, email, or phone value can become a scannable action. Fix the RSVP value or leave QR off when replies are handled elsewhere.
No. The link helps preserve the card details for a guest-facing view, but anyone with the link can view those details. Avoid putting private guest-specific information in the shared card.