|
|
|
|
|
|
by danielvaughn
923 days ago
|
|
|
Really well explained, and I'm definitely eating my words about the history of systematic design thought. Makes a ton of sense. Also I think you're spot on about the current state of design systems. I believe the solution is to create some kind of design toolchain that shepherds designers into the pit of success[1], where the "system" simply reveals itself over time as the design is created. That way it isn't thought of as some external artifact, but the byproduct of the process itself. But this requires a complete rethinking, from first principles, what a design tool even is. Figma, for all its impressive technology, is really a traditional design tool with some modern features bolted on (collaboration, variants, variables, etc). [1] https://blog.codinghorror.com/falling-into-the-pit-of-succes... |
|
|
I agree with you -- a complete rethinking -- I've actually spent the past couple years thinking a lot a lot a lot about this. And it seems that it's not just a matter of a better design tool, but also a way of how design works in relation to code, and perhaps how the code itself changes!
Sometimes I think that Design Systems, which feel like they came from the design side of the divide, actually was a motion that started with engineering. All the componentization of React etc under the hood really powered the process where designers make components. Before that it was more typical for designers to provide these 1-page sheets with the colors, margins, etc that were more like a style guide than a system. And perhaps the strict component-based approach is part of what's throwing us into the pit of despair from time to time.