Closed: [community-group] [RFC] Glossary (#32)
Closed: [community-group] Defining "design token" from a "technical" perspective (#42)
Re: [community-group] [RFC] Glossary (#32)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Glossary (#32)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Glossary (#32)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Glossary (#32)
Re: [community-group] [RFC] Design Token authoring tools (#36)
Re: [community-group] Defining "design token" from a "technical" perspective (#42)
[community-group] Loosen up the color type (#79)
Re: [community-group] The Designer’s Workflow (#43)
- Re: [community-group] The Designer’s Workflow (#43)
- Re: [community-group] The Designer’s Workflow (#43)
- Re: [community-group] The Designer’s Workflow (#43)
- Re: [community-group] The Designer’s Workflow (#43)
- Re: [community-group] The Designer’s Workflow (#43)
[community-group] Value Definition Syntax for a tokens type (#78)
[community-group] [Format] Disambiguate RFC 2119 keywords where appropriate (#77)
[community-group] Merged Pull Request: Remove stale roadmap
Re: [community-group] Remove stale roadmap (#47)
[community-group] Pull Request: Fix/intro grammar
- Re: [community-group] Fix/intro grammar (#76)
- Re: [community-group] Fix/intro grammar (#76)
- [community-group] Closed Pull Request: Fix/intro grammar
- Re: [community-group] Fix/intro grammar (#76)
[community-group] Pull Request: Setup and editing instructions for technical reports
- Re: [community-group] Setup and editing instructions for technical reports (#75)
- Re: [community-group] Setup and editing instructions for technical reports (#75)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: Setup and editing instructions for technical reports
[community-group] Pull Request: fix formatting issues in groups and types
- Re: [community-group] fix formatting issues in groups and types (#74)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: fix formatting issues in groups and types
[community-group] Pull Request: feat: link #72 to the spec
- Re: [community-group] feat: link #72 to the spec (#73)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: feat: link #72 to the spec
[community-group] [Format] Group & file level properties (#72)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Group & file level properties (#72)
- Re: [community-group] Group & file level properties (#72)
- Re: [community-group] Group & file level properties (#72)
- Re: [community-group] Group & file level properties (#72)
- Re: [community-group] Group & file level properties (#72)
[community-group] Pull Request: feat: add specificity to token types. closes #58
- Re: [community-group] feat: add specificity to token types. closes #58 (#71)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: feat: add specificity to token types. closes #58
[community-group] Pull Request: Add Prettier pre-commit hook
- Re: [community-group] Add Prettier pre-commit hook (#70)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: Add Prettier pre-commit hook (#57 redux)
[community-group] Pull Request: Add `validate` script to check specs are valid
- Re: [community-group] Add `validate` script to check specs are valid (#69)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: Maintenance: add `validate` script, switch from `yarn` to `npm`, set default formatter for VS Code
[community-group] Pull Request: Test RFC-2119 styling
- Re: [community-group] Test RFC-2119 styling (#68)
- Re: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (#68)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords
- Re: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (#68)
- Re: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (#68)
[community-group] Fix formatting issues noted on https://github.com/design-tokens/community-group/pull/64 (#67)
[community-group] Consider using grammarly or hemingway to make language more understandable/inclusive (#66)
- Re: [community-group] Consider using grammarly or hemingway to make language more understandable/inclusive (#66)
- Re: [community-group] Consider using grammarly or hemingway to make language more understandable/inclusive (#66)
- Re: [community-group] Consider using grammarly or hemingway to make language more understandable/inclusive (#66)
- Re: [community-group] Consider using grammarly or hemingway to make language more understandable/inclusive (#66)
[community-group] Let's favor `strong` element over all caps for emphasis. (#65)
- Re: [community-group] Let's favor `strong` element over all caps for emphasis. (#65)
- Re: [community-group] Let's favor `strong` element over all caps for emphasis. (#65)
- Re: [community-group] Let's favor `strong` element over all caps for emphasis. (#65)
- Re: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHOULD…) (#65)
- Re: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHOULD…) (#65)
- Re: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHOULD…) (#65)
- Re: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHOULD…) (#65)
- Closed: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHOULD…) (#65)
- Re: [community-group] Improve readability of RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHOULD…) (#65)
[community-group] Pull Request: Synchronize with latest version of google doc
- Re: [community-group] Synchronize with latest version of google doc (#64)
- Re: [community-group] Synchronize with latest version of google doc (#64)
- Re: [community-group] Synchronize with latest version of google doc (#64)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: Synchronize with latest version of google doc
[community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token types - optional or required (#63)
[community-group] [Format] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
- Re: [community-group] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
- Re: [community-group] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
- Re: [community-group] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
- Re: [community-group] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
- Re: [community-group] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
- Re: [community-group] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
- Re: [community-group] Are token descriptions optional or required? (#62)
[community-group] [Format] Token name - reserved words (#61)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token name - reserved words (#61)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token name - reserved words (#61)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token name - reserved words (#61)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token name - reserved words (#61)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token name - reserved words (#61)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token name - reserved words (#61)
[community-group] [Format] Token name character restrictions (#60)
[community-group] [Format] Token name case sensitivity (#59)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token name case sensitivity (#59)
- Re: [community-group] Token name case sensitivity (#59)
[community-group] [Format] Token value - string, number, array, object? (#58)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token value - string, number, array, object? (#58)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Token value - string, number, array, object? (#58)
- Closed: [community-group] [Format] Token value - string, number, array, object? (#58)
[community-group] Pull Request: Prettier pre-commit hook
- Re: [community-group] Prettier pre-commit hook (#57)
- Re: [community-group] Prettier pre-commit hook (#57)
- [community-group] Closed Pull Request: Prettier pre-commit hook
- Re: [community-group] Prettier pre-commit hook (#57)
[community-group] Pull Request: Adding prettier pre-commit hook
- Re: [community-group] Adding prettier pre-commit hook (#56)
- [community-group] Closed Pull Request: Adding prettier pre-commit hook
Closed: [community-group] [RFC] Format specification (#1)
[community-group] [Format] Object vs Array (#55)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Object vs Array (#55)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Object vs Array (#55)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Object vs Array (#55)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Object vs Array (#55)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Object vs Array (#55)
- Re: [community-group] Object vs Array (#55)
[community-group] [Format] Should composites be part of the MVP specification? (#54)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Should composites be part of the MVP specification? (#54)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Should composites be part of the MVP specification? (#54)
- Re: [community-group] [Format] Should composites be part of the MVP specification? (#54)
- Re: [community-group] Should composites be part of the MVP specification? (#54)
[community-group] [Format] Type: font name (#53)
[community-group] Pull Request: Add composite types section
- Re: [community-group] Add composite types section (#52)
- Re: [community-group] Add composite types section (#52)
- Re: [community-group] Add composite types section (#52)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: Add composite types section
[community-group] Pull Request: Renamed vendor attribute to extensions
- Re: [community-group] Renamed vendor attribute to extensions (#51)
- [community-group] Merged Pull Request: Renamed vendor attribute to extensions
[community-group] Pull Request: Testing workflow
- Re: [community-group] Testing workflow (#50)
- [community-group] Closed Pull Request: Testing workflow
Re: [community-group] [RFC] Format specification (#1)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Format specification (#1)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Format specification (#1)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Format specification (#1)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Format specification (#1)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Format specification (#1)
- Re: [community-group] [RFC] Format specification (#1)