[hamidpalo]

This isn't really material, but more of a "I've copied the colors and misused them."

A huge part of material is animations and behaviors and this doesn't have it. Simplest example is buttons. Go to http://www.google.com/design/ and over over the more button (or anything else that's clickable). You'll see it elevate a bit as if to come up and meet your cursor. Compare that to the buttons from the toolkit.

[AJ007]

Conceivably a company could spend a million dollars on implementation and upkeep without using a pre written framework. The amount of detailed rules and yes/no's really is excessive. Besides telling designers animation acceleration behaviors it includes specifications on what kind of photographs are acceptable or not.

Just like a religion telling people how, what, and when to eat the whole thing almost comes across as a compliance test. It is more absurd because user interface design is art. It is also a fundamental piece of branding: how magazines, web sites, and software communicate their differentiations to their user base.

As someone who pays a hell of a lot of attention to user interface design, and has run continuous A/B tests for years to millions of people, some of the elements are questionable. If you implement them you will confuse a sizable number of users. It looks good, but does not come across as one of those things like where Google tests multiple shades of a single color to see which works the best.

[kortes]

I agree. But you gotta start somewhere. The first step is to just recreate the components.

Feel free to contribute with your ideas and add some neat CSS3 animations to the framework.

[orbifold]

Have you looked into the polymer elements http://www.polymer-project.org/docs/elements/? I'm not sure if it would be against the license, but in principle they have a complete implementation of the material design that could be extracted as a separate css-only framework.

[rictic]

Polymer is licensed under BSD so it shouldn't be hard at all to do that and comply.