* 18F and USDS (USA): https://18f.gsa.gov/ and https://www.usds.gov/
* GSA Technology Transformation Service: https://www.gsa.gov/about-us/organization/federal-acquisitio...
* US Web Design System: https://v2.designsystem.digital.gov/
* Government Digital Service (UK): https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/government-digit...
* GOV.UK Design System: https://design-system.service.gov.uk/
An - admittedly cursory - search for non-Anglophone governments that promote the use of a design system only brought up the Swiss federal government: https://swiss.github.io/styleguide/en/
Both Finnish and Estonian authorities are said to be working on a styleguide but apart from a guide on the Estonian part that mainly focuses on Estonia as a brand there doesn't seem to be anything publicly available yet: https://brand.estonia.ee/design/
Still, for instance I wasn't able to find anything for either the French or the German authorities in their respective local languages.
For Dutch government services on the other hand there's the Rijkshuisstijl styleguide: https://www.rijkshuisstijl.nl/
(I just didn't find it at first because I searched for something along the lines of "nederlands overheid" rather than the official term "rijksoverheid").
Sure, there is duplication of work, redundancy etc. But what you end up with is a much wider surface area to try different things, better things, copy ideas and combine good ideas in different ways.
On the contrary, if every country just pools ideas and selects the 'best' via a giant committee selection process, would you really expect that to produce a better result over the longer term? (Genuine question and I'm open to the answer being yes but I personally suspect not).
UN guidelines to ensure said infrastructure is available and accessible to a countries population would make sense though.
Given that these are presumably research-based guidelines specific to that government's network of sites, that number would be 1.
Now, if only we can extend this to our local state government...
Hit tab and scroll through the page:
* Buttons overview - Australian Government Design System || https://designsystem.gov.au/components/buttons/
And then compare it to this page:
* Buttons | United States Web Design System || https://v2.designsystem.digital.gov/components/buttons/
A lot of elements don't do a great job with lining up the focus states, they seem just sort of bolted on.
Here are a few issues I saw: https://imgur.com/a/t0iwmWi
But seriously, I can only think of a handful of official things that use the "official" colours, lots of sports teams but not really used by the government.
Edit: Parent originally mentioned that the website doesn't use the "Official Australian Colours".
I removed that part of the comment
As an American living in Sydney, and working for an agency, I feel like accessibility is behind the US. This set of tools should help, but also the use of Lighthouse by QA teams is key.
With Lighthouse, any score below 90 on any metric means our work fails QA —- it’s in our contracts to exceed 90. As a result, our clients rave about how easy it was to pass accessibility and security audits. Only secret is Lighthouse, and other automated checks, as part of the build process.
Making everything work nicely in our Single Page Apps is a nightmare.
If you know it's a target when you are in architecture, much easier to design it in a way that will pass the tests.
Not saying that it's always perfect, but generally speaking having tests is better than not. Just key to have the tests early and often, so you can fix issues before they get baked in throughout a complex system.
We have a lot of work to do for PWA's and performance. We have some issues open in the backlog however they will require some architectural changes and require a bit more time.
While this is neat, whats the guarantee this will be kept up to date over the next 1,2 or 5 years?
They're not pitching it as a design framework for others to use.
They're just showing the design framework they use internally. They guarantee they will keep it as up to date as they need it for as long as they need it as they own it and they're paying people to work on it.
Apart from that the whole effort looks pretty polished.
Our main menu has just been released and is going through usability testing right now.
During the design process we experimented with underlines on the active main menu item, however it felt messy.
Feel free to create an issue on GitHub if you want to start a discussion.
Worksafe Victoria uses Vue for their design system: https://todaydesign.github.io/worksafe-frontend/
The department I work for still uses Knockout/Durandal for example.
I'll have a wild stab in the dark in saying that if the stack is really tightly coupled, that there's extra labour required by the dev team to meet the Digital Service Standard. Which is, really speaking, unnecessary public expenditure.
The frameworks we are using have been in use here since 2014 (pre-dating the DesignSystem). It is not an easy matter to switch over to these components, especially considering the only framework supported is React.
As far as unnecessary public expenditure... I could probably write 1000 pages on it and not make a dent.
Is it just me or does
load with no stylesheet.
Fast and useable like it's 1996!
Looks fine on desktop and regular Firefox for Android.
Is there anyway to debug what got blocked? seems other sites have reported this false positive too https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/focus-android/issues/2772
They both work for the same cunts though: the Australian people. Although you would never guess that if you spoke to actual Australians.