- From: Kevin Muldoon via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 13:53:59 +0000
- To: public-design-tokens-log@w3.org
> > ### What PR [#298](https://github.com/design-tokens/community-group/pull/298) Introduced > > ...this example, `accent.light` and `accent.dark` are **NOT** variants of one another. Those could just as well be named `accent`, `accent.strong`, and `accent.stronger`. The PR does **NOT** introduce any notion of a token containing variants. > TBH, it would have been much clearer had the example had been `accent.$root`, `accent.strong`, `accent.stronger` and I was challenged to understand the exact purpose of PR #298 (though I carefully mused on the wording for quite a while). Surely, despite the misunderstanding, the original issue exists. "the spec currently lacks a standardized mechanism for parsers to programmatically discover which sibling keys represent variants", or to put it another way, I have no reliable mechanism to programmatically determine that 'accent' has N number of definitions - which should be of some concern to those seeking to transform the design.tokens into platform code via StyleDictionary. -- GitHub Notification of comment by caoimghgin Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/design-tokens/community-group/issues/348#issuecomment-3511789915 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 10 November 2025 13:54:00 UTC