One thing at a time. We are building software and we can't get everything
right first time :)
I agree semantic names are what we should aim to but the purpose of the
numeric colours was an attempt to at least stop introducing even more :)
Sounds like we have identified disabledComponentGray to go with
disabledTextGray during this process:)
On 19 Aug 2014 16:32, "Jared Zimmerman" <jared.zimmerman(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
MZ we had that conversation already ;) we opted for semantic names for
colors, and
numerical names for our limited grey palette. The Living style
guide will outline some uses for each grey but they will be divergent
enough that a single name is not likely to make sense. If when we are
building the color usage section of the living style guide we find enough
commonality in usages for the shades of grey we can revisit semantic names.
Jared Zimmerman \\ Director of User Experience \\ Wikimedia Foundation
M +1 415 609 4043 \\ @jaredzimmerman
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 4:21 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:
>
> Jared Zimmerman wrote:
> > I definitely think we should dim the text as well I think B works well,
> >we should just make sure we're using existing LESS greys for everything.
>
> I'd also argue that we need fewer grays. Surely fifteen grays is
overkill.
>
> I think enumerating the grays was kind of a cop-out. We should be able to
> clearly define each gray, recognizing of course that naming is very
> difficult. If a gray and its purpose can't be clearly defined, it
probably
> doesn't need to be part of the palette. For
now, we can side-step the
fact
that most of
these colors are indistinguishable on the hardware that many
users use (both human eyes and computer monitors). :-)
MZMcBride
_______________________________________________
Design mailing list
Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_______________________________________________
Design mailing list
Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design