- From: Kevin Muldoon via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 23:50:37 +0000
- To: public-design-tokens-log@w3.org
@phun-ky Well said, and absolutely true! Designers and developers do speak different languages, share different cultures, and approach problems from distinct perspectives. Yet, if we took one suggestion from @ipaintcode and solved that, wouldn't the world be a better place? For instance... - **Token Naming Convention**: A clear and consistent system for naming. Category-property-value (think color-background-primary) This is a step in the right direction, though I would advocate for the much richer taxonomy that CTI+ offers (Domain, Category, Type, Item, SubItem, Varient, and Context) with additional metadata tags to indicate subbrands/subthemes, and modes. Possibly a bit more. However, such granularity requires a defined 'schema' to map input from tokens to code output. As a community, I don't think we're nearly aligned on that concept, as JSON was created to be simple to read and not require an additional file to make code sense of it. While I advocate strongly for @ipaintcode ideas, I'm not sure we're ready. Perhaps W3C Design Tokens v2.0. But let's try not to wait another year or more before v1 gets out the door ;-) -- GitHub Notification of comment by caoimghgin Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/design-tokens/community-group/issues/220#issuecomment-1577696800 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 5 June 2023 23:50:39 UTC