Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What design tools get wrong

kilianvalkhof.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 84 posts

Re: What design tools get wrong

#41

Post by diegof79 »

doitLP wrote: post #5

Sounds like the author wants his tools to be as fully featured as the code that will embody the resultant design. In that case I would recommend learning more code instead of relying on a proxy that will never be as flexible. The best designers I’ve worked with not only understand their own domain but the possibilities and limitations of how it will be executed, because they are also developers.

When you say "I would recommend learning more code instead" it's aggressive since there are different areas of expertise that contribute to a product. But in general, anything that is not "code" is underrated by software engineers. I would recommend learning more product design instead :o)

I can comment on this from my experience. I studied Computer Science, and my passion for UI development led me to switch to product design after being coding for more than 10 years. I design with code too, and I did many prototypes using different UI frameworks.

But, there are different design activities, and sadly not a single tool is adequate for all.

If you are making decisions about UI layout, visuals, or UI motion working with code may slow you down. Even if you use CSS grids and flex, there is a penalty caused by the lack of direct manipulation and the freedom to try multiple ideas quickly.

To me, the author just wants better refactoring and maintenance tools over the existing visual design tools. It's a little bit disappointing that design tools evolved in many areas, but did a regression in others. For example, more or less in 2008, Microsoft did a tool called Expression Blend. The tool, based on ideas from Bill Buxton, had the goal to maintain a continuity between mocks and the final implementation. You were able to import PSD layers and later convert them to components, or to sketch the UI flow in the tool. I never used it for anything more than simple experiments, but the idea had potential. Even Adobe did a similar project that never saw the light (it was called Adobe Thermo, then Catalyst and it died with Flex).

Re: What design tools get wrong

#42

Post by grey-area »

jasim wrote: post #20
doitLP wrote: post #5

Sounds like the author wants his tools to be as fully featured as the code that will embody the resultant design. In that case I would recommend learning more code instead of relying on a proxy that will never be as flexible. The best designers I’ve worked with not only understand their own domain but the possibilities and limitations of how it will be executed, because they are also developers.

When someone says HTML & CSS is terrible I ask them to design something better that lets you represent user interfaces that can adapt across multiple screen sizes, and allow complex layouts that Flexbox and CSS Grid makes possible. It is easy to criticize something if you don't have to worry how you would do it better. That said, HTML & CSS is just how the world currently is. It doesn't mean that it is the best possi…

HTML was and is wonderful in its simplicity and flexibility.

CSS was not fit for purpose until relatively recently, and is still pretty limited and broken. It’s telling that you mention features of CSS which were only recently usable.

Problems with CSS - lack of a proper grid till recently, lack of variables, byzantine box model rules, a profusion of units (px,em,en,%), lack of simple computed widths etc.

All these are fixable/being fixed but I would not be sorry if the whole mess was thrown out and a more considered styling language introduced.

Re: What design tools get wrong

#43

Post by burgerboy »

grey-area wrote: post #42
jasim wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When someone says HTML & CSS is terrible I ask them to design something better that lets you represent user interfaces that can adapt across multiple screen sizes, and allow complex layouts that Flexbox and CSS Grid makes possible. It is easy to criticize something if you don't have to worry how you would do it better. That said, HTML & CSS is just how the world currently is. It doesn't mean that it is the best possi…

HTML was and is wonderful in its simplicity and flexibility. CSS was not fit for purpose until relatively recently, and is still pretty limited and broken. It’s telling that you mention features of CSS which were only recently usable. Problems with CSS - lack of a proper grid till recently, lack of variables, byzantine box model rules, a profusion of units (px,em,en,%), lack of simple computed widths etc. All these a…

You obviously don't know css very well or you would know the things you are saying are wrong

Re: What design tools get wrong

#44

Post by EvilTerran »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #23

Somewhat off topic, but this gets at an issue with “components” of all types that I’ve been wanting to get off my chest: > Design libraries are also limited in the type of things they share: just components or symbols. This works great if all your design work is just clicking together new screens with the same components, but anything new will see designers clicking into components and copying over things like colors…

Are you aware of the Links programming language / research project? It lets you write code in a uniform syntax that compiles down to a mixture of Javascript, server-side code, and SQL - all from the same source file, if you like. Client- and server-side Links code can call each other seamlessly; and it has a syntax for inline HTML fragments is strikingly similar to, and I suspect influenced, JSX.

Not quite the same thing as you describe, but it's exploring a similar part of the design space:

http://links-lang.org/

Re: What design tools get wrong

#45

Post by TeMPOraL »

quirkot wrote: post #33
ThomPete wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the best designers understand code. Its not turtles all the way back as you seem to imply. In general a broad perspective is beneficial to a designer because they deal with the holistic reality and need to apply it to a somewhat fuzzy solution. To compete with others thats more than enough and tools have very little to do with it.

Out in the real world, I agree with you. I this specific instance I was responding mainly to this comment: >Sounds like the author wants his tools to be as fully featured as the code that will embody the resultant design. In that case I would recommend learning more code instead of relying on a proxy that will never be as flexible Which is precisely an argument by turtles.

Argument by turtles is only invalid if it doesn't converge in the end. If a professional designer needs to have less than half of a professional coder's expertise, and a professional coder needs to have less than half of a professional hardware engineer's expertise, etc., then the whole thing converges to a finite value.

An alternative way to view this: the output of your work in your field will almost always be priced and used outside of that field. The more you know about how your work will be used, the more context you have to evaluate whether or not you're doing things right. Given how human cognition works, having extreme tunnel vision is actually suboptimal, compared to being somewhat proficient in things around your particular specialty.

Re: What design tools get wrong

#46

Post by zelon88 »

jasim wrote: post #20
doitLP wrote: post #5

Sounds like the author wants his tools to be as fully featured as the code that will embody the resultant design. In that case I would recommend learning more code instead of relying on a proxy that will never be as flexible. The best designers I’ve worked with not only understand their own domain but the possibilities and limitations of how it will be executed, because they are also developers.

When someone says HTML & CSS is terrible I ask them to design something better that lets you represent user interfaces that can adapt across multiple screen sizes, and allow complex layouts that Flexbox and CSS Grid makes possible. It is easy to criticize something if you don't have to worry how you would do it better. That said, HTML & CSS is just how the world currently is. It doesn't mean that it is the best possi…

I would never work with a design person who only knew how to click buttons to make UI's.

They're just going to make more work for the real developers who have to constantly fill in the lack of understanding about how the back-end works.

It isn't a limitation. It's a prerequisite. You wouldn't want a bus driver who's never driven a car before.

And if design systems ever evolve to the point where you can just click/drag some buttons to design a UI then that's the day the value of that profession should rightfully drop to zero. Lowering the bar that low only leads to vulnerabilities by blurring the lines between amateur and professional. Honestly the design crowd gets too much credit as it is.

Look at manual machinists. They have legitimate skills that only come with experience. They demand righteous salaries for those skills. BUT CNC machines have all but destroyed the need to employ manual machinists so instead you spend more on your machine up-front but you save forever because you can literally teach anybody with a pulse how to run it. The result is you have countless experienced and skilled machinists who are unemployable in today's market and a bunch of cheap amateurs churning out barely conforming products for $10/hour.

Re: What design tools get wrong

#47

Post by paulddraper »

jimktrains2 wrote: post #38
paulddraper wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> allow complex layouts that Flexbox and CSS Grid makes possible What version of CSS do people complain about? By chance are you talking about bleeding edge unaccepted CSS proposals? In any case, the list of CSS improvements is long. Off the top of my head: * Remove min-height, max-height, vertical-align, text-align, etc. in favor of unified Flex model. * Rename color to font-color. * Default to box-sizing (or remove…

I'd go further and bring in some of the nesting, inheritance/extend and variables that preprocessors like SCSS support as part of the standard.

Even just nested would be nice, and very simple.

Re: What design tools get wrong

#48

Post by AriaMinaei »

diegof79 wrote: post #41
doitLP wrote: post #5

Sounds like the author wants his tools to be as fully featured as the code that will embody the resultant design. In that case I would recommend learning more code instead of relying on a proxy that will never be as flexible. The best designers I’ve worked with not only understand their own domain but the possibilities and limitations of how it will be executed, because they are also developers.

When you say "I would recommend learning more code instead" it's aggressive since there are different areas of expertise that contribute to a product. But in general, anything that is not "code" is underrated by software engineers. I would recommend learning more product design instead :o) I can comment on this from my experience. I studied Computer Science, and my passion for UI development led me to switch to produ…

I'm working on a tool with the express goal of "maintaining continuity between mocks and final implementation." I think I could learn a few things about this from you. Would you have time for a chat? My email is my account name at gmail dot com.

Re: What design tools get wrong

#49

Post by holy_city »

jasim wrote: post #20
doitLP wrote: post #5

Sounds like the author wants his tools to be as fully featured as the code that will embody the resultant design. In that case I would recommend learning more code instead of relying on a proxy that will never be as flexible. The best designers I’ve worked with not only understand their own domain but the possibilities and limitations of how it will be executed, because they are also developers.

When someone says HTML & CSS is terrible I ask them to design something better that lets you represent user interfaces that can adapt across multiple screen sizes, and allow complex layouts that Flexbox and CSS Grid makes possible. It is easy to criticize something if you don't have to worry how you would do it better. That said, HTML & CSS is just how the world currently is. It doesn't mean that it is the best possi…

>When someone says HTML & CSS is terrible I ask them to design something better that lets you represent user interfaces that can adapt across multiple screen sizes, and allow complex layouts that Flexbox and CSS Grid makes possible

Short answer: layout and styling in one DSL with one syntax/grammar and not you know, two. But the problem isn't "how do I make something that's better" but "how do I make something that's better and supported on my target platforms."

If browser engine support isn't a design concern there are plenty of alternatives, many of which are arguably superior to HTML + CSS.

Re: What design tools get wrong

#50

Post by jasim »

zelon88 wrote: post #46
jasim wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When someone says HTML & CSS is terrible I ask them to design something better that lets you represent user interfaces that can adapt across multiple screen sizes, and allow complex layouts that Flexbox and CSS Grid makes possible. It is easy to criticize something if you don't have to worry how you would do it better. That said, HTML & CSS is just how the world currently is. It doesn't mean that it is the best possi…

I would never work with a design person who only knew how to click buttons to make UI's. They're just going to make more work for the real developers who have to constantly fill in the lack of understanding about how the back-end works. It isn't a limitation. It's a prerequisite. You wouldn't want a bus driver who's never driven a car before. And if design systems ever evolve to the point where you can just click/dra…

On the reverse, let designers refuse to work with developers who have never observed users using their product (user research in formal terms), or don't understand color theory, or haven't designed a landing page that converts well, don't know how to use Sketch or Figma.

I've been trying to learn how to do design well - struggling to get the onboarding UX for a complex workflow right. It is something very difficult for me to solve well, but a good designer can start iterating in a few days' time. Design is indeed a valuable and deep craft, and my lack of respect for it in the past stemmed from not knowing it and not having worked with masters in the field.

Yes it would be wonderful if designers also understood HTML & CSS - it is quite adjacent to their area of expertise. But is it a deep enough skill if the market doesn't award salaries to people who specialize only in HTML & CSS as much as it does for application developers?

The current designer-developer collaboration workflow is broken, and the dominant narrative blames designers for not learning HTML & CSS. I was also party to it till recently, but it is partly the fault of programmers who don't expend the effort to understand how design is done and what "good" looks like in that craft. It is also the fault of the current crop of tools - vector drawing tools that don't have abstractions nor supports responsive design, and HTML & CSS which is far removed from its visual rendering.

It is a give and take, and it is so much more fun to work when people are eager to learn from each other.

Post reply on HN