Let's talk about specific design systems. While the underlying concept benefits nearly any website, the reality is more nuanced.

Design systems are currently generating significant buzz. Recently, a new design system's public release prompted a flurry of messages urging me to check it out. My initial reaction? "Looks good." But that's like glancing at a new car's exterior – a superficial assessment. True understanding requires extensive use, building multiple projects with it to truly evaluate its strengths and weaknesses.

This raises crucial questions: Is this design system suitable for my projects? Who is the intended audience?

The Ubiquitous Accordion

Many, though not all, design systems include accordions. This isn't coincidental; it highlights a key point.

Bootstrap: A Familiar Benchmark

Bootstrap's widespread adoption and understanding provide a valuable comparison. Its CSS and HTML components are readily integrated, offering a straightforward development experience.

Whether Bootstrap is strictly a "design system" or a "pattern library" is debatable. However, the interchangeable use of these terms underscores the existing confusion.

Developers choose Bootstrap for several reasons:

• Accelerated development.
• High-quality components, beneficial for developers with less HTML/CSS expertise.
• Robust accessibility features.
• [Insert your reason here]

These benefits, while appealing, are becoming standard expectations for any modern design system, not unique to Bootstrap.

Exploring Alternatives to Bootstrap

Many developers seek alternatives to Bootstrap. Reasons include:

• Project requirements (e.g., React integration).
• Difficulty customizing Bootstrap.
• Aesthetic preferences.
• Simple boredom.

The motivations for choosing or rejecting Bootstrap are numerous.

Selecting a Design System: Beyond the Accordion

Choosing a design system requires careful consideration. Licensing is a critical factor. Salesforce's Lightning Design System, often cited as a leader, is open-source licensed (BSD Clause-3, with Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 for fonts and icons). This license clarifies its intended use: primarily for Salesforce and its associated development teams. While publicly available, it's not a general-purpose solution for all web developers.

Why is it public? Salesforce's scale necessitates accessibility for both internal and external teams. Public availability facilitates collaboration and broadens its impact.

The discussion around open-source design systems and their specific use cases remains ongoing. Is "open source" the appropriate term, or is "source available" more accurate given the context-specific nature of design systems?

IBM's Carbon Design System, another open-source option, explicitly states its target audience: IBM designers and developers working on IBM products. While usable by others, its primary focus remains internal.

Company-Specific Focus

Company-created design systems inherently serve the company's needs first. Open-source licensing doesn't negate this primary focus. The same principle applies to government-developed systems, such as the U.S. Web Design System, which prioritizes government websites.

The U.S. Web Design System, largely public domain, is a valuable resource, but its design prioritizes government needs, not individual developers. Its open-source nature facilitates community contributions, impacting websites crucial to public life.

The Spectrum of Customizability

Design systems offer varying degrees of customizability:

• Zero Customizability: Enforcing strict consistency.
• Pre-Selected Variations: Offering limited customization options (e.g., color variations).
• BYO Theme: Providing a flexible framework for extensive customization.

Shopify's Polaris design system, while open-source, prioritizes internal consistency over extensive customization, unlike Bootstrap.

Google's Material Design, initially for internal use, is now actively promoted for external use. While initially enforcing a Google aesthetic, it's becoming more customizable, allowing for branding integration. Companies like Lyft, Zappos, and NPR demonstrate successful customization.

The messaging surrounding Material Design highlights the complexities of open-source design systems. It's simultaneously for Google and for anyone else who wants to use it, a feat enabled by Google's resources and brand recognition.

Design systems are not commodities; choosing one based solely on aesthetics is insufficient. Licensing, intended audience, and customizability must be carefully considered.

My advice to creators of public design systems: Clearly define your target audience and permitted usage. The interpretation of target audience messaging varies widely, underscoring the need for clear communication.

The above is the detailed content of Who Are Design Systems For?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!