- From: James Nash via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 13:30:31 +0000
- To: public-design-tokens-log@w3.org
Thanks for pointing that out. That text could be worded better, and isn't really aligned with the definitions of "design token" we have in [our glossary](https://www.designtokens.org/glossary/) and [format spec](https://tr.designtokens.org/format/#design-token) respectively: > The single source of truth to name and store a design decision, distributed so teams can use it across design tools and coding languages. > A (Design) Token is an information associated with a name, at minimum a name/value pair. (TBH, I think that text is just something that predates our gloassary definition, which we forgot to update) You're quite right - aspects of a design like colors, typography, spacing, etc. are as old as design itself and not something we're trying to invent a new name for. However, I'd argue the act of choosing a specific color/size/whatever, naming that choice within the context of a design system and all the methodologies around naming, organising, theming, etc. that have grown up around that, _are_ more novel. If we were to update the "indivisible pieces of a design system" line in our [technical reports intro](https://tr.designtokens.org/) to be aligned with the definitions I cited above, would that be better? -- GitHub Notification of comment by c1rrus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/design-tokens/community-group/issues/231#issuecomment-1820931203 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2023 13:30:33 UTC