- From: Travis Spomer via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2022 22:25:26 +0000
- To: public-design-tokens-log@w3.org
Sure, I understand what lossy means. I just don't understand why you're seeing that as a negative. Any design token system is necessarily going to involve a process of back-and-forth iteration until naming schemes are agreed upon; this is just part of that process. A name collision is a build error that requires a dev to tell a designer "hey you did something stupid." But it's not really any different from "hey we spell it 'grey' in our design system, not 'gray'" or anything else that requires back-and-forth. Building or updating a design system involves a lot of those conversations over the course of months and years, and no rule we can add to this spec will really help avoid that without making something else worse. Anyway, I don't think I have anything else to add here. I think that what you're proposing makes a lot more sense as a rule for a specific design system and not as a rule in the spec. But I do not wish to be accused of bringing holleration or hateration to this reposit'ry—I'll let someone else speak up. -- GitHub Notification of comment by TravisSpomer Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/design-tokens/community-group/issues/119#issuecomment-1073361058 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 20 March 2022 22:25:27 UTC