I normally chalk these articles off as fluff/advertising. “How many of these companies really need a design system?” I think that question is still important; some companies prematurely optimize by spending too much time on this stuff rather than just building their product.

But this one I enjoyed going through. It was a good blend between visual presentation of the system, and commentary about the system.

It's pretty, but what's the point of this article if there's nothing to download and use? In the comments someone says "it's coming" but the announcement seems premature.

Interesting. No mention of user testing, or how the system was validated that it matches the supposed qualities of "inclusiveness" (I guess more common word would be accessibility) and "user centricity".

There's this thing that bugs me with the current "design system" trend. Originally the term refers to a system for expressing a _specific_ design, as in an extensive styleguide. A design system ought to be a flow of rules meant to govern the appearance reflecting a brand, a vibe or character, and ensure there is a foundation to guide any kind of composition into a coherent, unified look.

Yet it has become a new synonym for something like the olden "css framework". A component library with certain extent of customisability on the very lowest level, color, typography and have a few options. Use it as your own, skip the "designing" part altogether.

But the true purpose of a design system in its original sense is to direct the layers of design above these fundamentals, to consolidate identity across all communication media used.

Maybe I'm overly conservative or opinionated here, and the word has another meaning for the web/app design community today. But i can't help but feeling like it's become a marketing buzzword for "todays Bootstraps".

I think this design system made by Zomato is just that though, a foundation and tool to communicate in a unified and consistent manner... for Zomato.

I agree with you about bootstrap, bulma, material design, etc... it seems really weird to adopt an off-the-shelf visual language. I think in most cases the convenience of doing so outweighs the the disadvantage of looking like everything else. And in other cases looking like everything else can actually be an advantage.

I wish less companies created a "design system" and more companies used bloody standard OS and web widgets, especially drop down selections...

This; and - we don't need to hear the rationale every time. My first company kept global css in a repo for all our projects to use, and we didn't need a cookie for our thought leadership. It's fine if you're proud of your design team but don't claim to have invented reusable UI.

From the article: "A design system is a large set of reusable components with a set of rules..."

From the article also: "A design system should not simply be a collection of user interface components along with some design theory.."

Really nice. How do you ensure developers are in sync with design system ?