It was never meant to be a static spec, but a system that adapts and changes w/in a framework. It becomes what we need it to be.
-
-
-
Replying to @danmall @danielmall
anyone using the MD spec can modify it, but rule changes require consensus (like a constitutional amendment)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DaveHogue
: is that different than any other design system out there?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danmall @danielmall
I've seen lots of teams create a spec, say its modifiable, then fail to evolve and maintain it, or refuse to.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DaveHogue
: Intention can be contrary to outcome though. Isn’t it still possible for Material Design to still experience entropy?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danmall @danielmall
Definitely. This is all predicated on the assumption that people want to evolve it and are committed to having it persist.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DaveHogue
: Right on. And so far, that’s been the case, yeah?
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danmall @danielmall
I suppose the trick to longevity is to design a system that can absorb, adjust, and account for as many exceptions as possible.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
You're looking at NASA - they are a great example of adaptable systems with severely limiting constraints.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.