> And IMO, designers should stick to their favorite tool, and leave implementation details to programmers. I'm curious about how this would work if the designe

> And IMO, designers should stick to their favorite tool, and leave implementation details to programmers. I'm curious about how this would work if the designers have to use developer tools to do the final spit-and-polish. I don't know about how other places do it, but what I'm familiar with is that a UI mockup is sketched out and requirements given to the developer, the developer implements something but in the process finds issues with the design as specified and iterates a bit while doing so, and eventually you have something that is functional but somewhat ugly because the original sketch was not specific enough or didn't anticipate some issues that came up or the like, and then finally you give it back to the designer to do the spit-and-polish. In some cases, the spit-and-polish can be a lot of work, because you've used some new widgets that you don't already have standard styles and graphics for, or maybe it's your first app with a new toolkit and so you need to figure out how to get your branding and style to work with it. For designers I've worked with, CSS is their favorite tool for styling, and they prefer UI tools for spit-and-polish layout tweaks. Are you saying that they should just deal with having to learn how to do all of that embedded in code, or that they should just hand off their assets and suggestions to the developers and the developers have to do the final spit-and-polish work?