There is so much praise in this comment section, that I gotta be the grumpy negative guy: It isn't good yet: * The brutalist/minimal style is so reduced yet b

There is so much praise in this comment section, that I gotta be the grumpy negative guy: It isn't good yet: * The brutalist/minimal style is so reduced yet blown-up I find it confusing to grasp sections. E.g. on first visit (incognito) visiting https://design-system.service.gov.uk/styles/ https://design-system.service.gov.uk/styles/ all this monster cookie notice, footer, whitespace leaves the actual content maybe just 10 percent on a regular desktop screen. * Tables ( https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/table/ https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/table/ ) are so minimalistic (no vertical column separators, no color shading to context, no visual scrollability hints), plenty of scenarios exist where visually reading tables becomes hard. You need visual separations between columns when the header is far away (and non-sticky). Also, all this empty table void does not communicate to mobile / small screen users that they can horizontally scroll tables. The mini examples on https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/table/ https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/table/ don't show these apparent issues. * Would you have guessed "HTML"/"Nunjuck" have tabbish behavior and reveal content on-page on click? They look like regular navigational links. * HTML code is way too verbose and there is plenty of unnecessary nested div soups. What is the need for `class="govuk-footer__meta-item govuk-footer__meta-item--grow"`? Do you need to be so specific? (Hint: you don't; a wrapper class is often enough for any further (CSS/JS) matching). https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/footer/ https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/footer/ * Does not allow more than one skip link ( https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/skip-link https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/skip-link ), as they are visually overlapping. * https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/inset-text/ https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/inset-text/ There are dedicated HTML elements which semantically fulfill this div component's purpose (`blockquote`, `aside`...) * File upload component: No value added to what browsers have out of the box ( https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/file-upload/ https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/file-upload/) * Buttons and color: No matter if default (green), secondary (grey) or warning (red): the moment these buttons receive focus, they all get the same focus color yellow, thereby no longer communicating their intent visually. * Accordions, they are just confusing: where does a accordion's content start and end? Put some borders around it. The over-the-top focus highlight adds to this confusion https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/accordion/ https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/accordion/ * ... Which brings me to the last point: The screaming focus yellow highlight. This and other stuff in this design system is bleeding-edge accessibility conformity: crank accessibility to 150%, help some with it, but also leave others confused by it. Maybe think about `:focus-visible` instead of `:focus`. But hey, Chrome Lighthouse gives 100/100 ;-). To end on something positive, I checked with NVDA and keyboard input superficially (e.g. search box) and accessibility/ `aria-` markup looked fine.