3 ms·

We use figma quite extensively as a reference for our current project. The disgners constantly move stuff around, so the links to them, in tasks, break and poin

We use figma quite extensively as a reference for our current project. The disgners constantly move stuff around, so the links to them, in tasks, break and point to nothing. Which is a major pain in the ass indeed. So yeah, 100% agree that the "big bulletin approach" is a negative.

ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
And this M.O. would seem to make zero steps toward recognizing the tedium of their platform: "By hovering and clicking around the Figma canvas, you can find and export all the information you need" Because "hovering" over every shape or area in a screenful of design content to prospect for hidden goodies, then exporting them one by one, is a great way for developers to acquire a complete rundown of what they need to implement. I guess I can't speak for all developers, but I don't want to dick around with an Advent calendar that's masquerading as a design document. Meanwhile, has Figma fixed the absurd confusion that it presents in the UI between projects and teams? It seriously confuses those two things right there on the "home" page of your account. And finally, for those who don't want to support Adobe's software-rental nonsense, there is an open-source alternative to Figma called Penpot: https://penpot.app https://penpot.app
noizejoy 3y ago
I suspect, that the main problem is inconsistency in the underlying mental model, because there’s multiple individuals doing that and/or over longer periods of time. I can typically figure out a mental model, even if designed by someone else (assuming they are somewhat consistent), pretty well and fast. — But it’s the inconsistency, that screws things up for me.
tharkun__ 3y ago
I've completely reneged on linking to figma in individual tasks. I take screenshots of the state of figma at the time we all agreed that "this is it" (or close enough to what we'll implement). Sure I'll leave a link in the epic to the figma "bulletin board" for that feature so that people can find it and look around. But that's it. We're also never gonna implement exactly what's shown in figma (or said screenshots) either because it would take forever to get the designers to actually adjust everything to look like it does in product. They can never seem to get the look to match what our standard UI library looks like. Which is a shame because every new developer always tries to match what the design shows instead of sticking with the standard library. Honestly, the best thing would be if figma wasn't used at all and the designers just used black and white lines and boxes and focus on good UX instead of pixel perfect UI designs.
- Akronymus 3y ago
  For us, figma has the final say in looks. So, it's actually a benefit that the designers can change it afterwards, as it is refined. They still have no incentives to keep the links up to date, though.
  - tharkun__ 3y ago
    Being able to change things as design is still in flow is great, agreed. Once something is agreed upon the ability to change things without notice is really bad, especially if you're expected to follow the design as it has "final say". You go an implement something on Monday based on designs and show it to stakeholders on Tuesday. They compare with the figma board and flogg you because it looks nothing like it. Ugh! (yes that's also a process failure but absent better processes I make my own process that doesn't get me flogged ;) )
    - andsoitis 3y ago
      That sounds like an opportunity to improve on collaboration (i.e. people talking, notifying each other) as well as trust ("compare with the figma board and flogg you because it looks nothing like it") For instance, if something is agreed upon and a designer changes it afterwards, they could simply give you a heads up that they intend to do so with context so the two of you can discuss. People > process.
      - tharkun__ 3y ago
        They could. They don't. It may not even be their fault. They don't know. They just change things. They live in their world. You tell them, they are sympathetic, apologize, vow to do better next time. They're in their world. They do it again. The flogging still happens. Is that broken? Yes! Does it still happen in too many companies? Yes! Is there an easy fix where you "trust but verify"? Yes! (as in, sure I trust they will notify me next time, which even if they actually do may be too late. So we made the process "figma is the 'working theory' and what we actually build will sorta look like that". Not every stakeholder may understand that but we sure will tell them when the flogging is about to start. (I say flogging, but in reality it's a gradient of course and while in some companies it will resemble an actual flogging quite closely in others it's more like what you describe. Not all countries and companies are as chill as some others ;))
spacemadness 3y ago
I feel like this is the UX designers version of “gives you enough rope to hang yourself with.”
NTARelix 3y ago
My designers take their own snapshot by cloning their work and using versions in the names of things. Older things are not to be modified with few exceptions. It makes for a good linking experience on my end, but I don't know what that kind of maintenance is like for them.
- softsound 3y ago
  This is my method, especially because it shows how design will progress, with tight deadlines this becomes harder but I still consider it a very valuable way of proving work (only a minor designer though with freelancing) I certainly can understand stand the move fast method of quickly changing things, when I'm doing concept work this makes more sense here. Long term though, if you actually care about your work you should be making copies or different boards to show how and when you made some decisions. Especially mayor design changes.(Granted I could just be a bad designer that just can't come up with a better workflow)
dawnerd 3y ago
Ugh yeah when designers change things after a client signs off and in the middle of implementation. It confuses everyone and no one remembers what was actually signed off.
balaji1 3y ago
Good product engineers just go with the flow - workflows with Figma is way up there, compared to without. Those folks were probably the early adopters, and they were much happier to work with designers now. Minor design details tend to change and even if they are missed out, they get caught at some point - cost of dev rework is generally manageable. Another big tool for bigger product teams has been component libraries (and corresponding Figma assets). That makes it all simpler.
- alwaysbeconsing 3y ago
  This is good, yes, but it requires that the team culture does not treat minor deviation from the Figma document as a bug or a failure of the developer. That mindset isn't always present, and it's not usually up to the product engineers themselves. It requires buy-in from the designers, product people, and managers.
sebazzz 3y ago
For this reason we use Zeplin, where designs are easily shared and versioned. For both developers and clients.

ShadowBanThis01 3y ago

And this M.O. would seem to make zero steps toward recognizing the tedium of their platform: "By hovering and clicking around the Figma canvas, you can find and export all the information you need" Because "hovering" over every shape or area in a screenful of design content to prospect for hidden goodies, then exporting them one by one, is a great way for developers to acquire a complete rundown of what they need to implement. I guess I can't speak for all developers, but I don't want to dick around with an Advent calendar that's masquerading as a design document. Meanwhile, has Figma fixed the absurd confusion that it presents in the UI between projects and teams? It seriously confuses those two things right there on the "home" page of your account. And finally, for those who don't want to support Adobe's software-rental nonsense, there is an open-source alternative to Figma called Penpot: https://penpot.app https://penpot.app

noizejoy 3y ago

I suspect, that the main problem is inconsistency in the underlying mental model, because there’s multiple individuals doing that and/or over longer periods of time. I can typically figure out a mental model, even if designed by someone else (assuming they are somewhat consistent), pretty well and fast. — But it’s the inconsistency, that screws things up for me.

tharkun__ 3y ago

I've completely reneged on linking to figma in individual tasks. I take screenshots of the state of figma at the time we all agreed that "this is it" (or close enough to what we'll implement). Sure I'll leave a link in the epic to the figma "bulletin board" for that feature so that people can find it and look around. But that's it. We're also never gonna implement exactly what's shown in figma (or said screenshots) either because it would take forever to get the designers to actually adjust everything to look like it does in product. They can never seem to get the look to match what our standard UI library looks like. Which is a shame because every new developer always tries to match what the design shows instead of sticking with the standard library. Honestly, the best thing would be if figma wasn't used at all and the designers just used black and white lines and boxes and focus on good UX instead of pixel perfect UI designs.

Akronymus 3y ago
For us, figma has the final say in looks. So, it's actually a benefit that the designers can change it afterwards, as it is refined. They still have no incentives to keep the links up to date, though.
- tharkun__ 3y ago
  Being able to change things as design is still in flow is great, agreed. Once something is agreed upon the ability to change things without notice is really bad, especially if you're expected to follow the design as it has "final say". You go an implement something on Monday based on designs and show it to stakeholders on Tuesday. They compare with the figma board and flogg you because it looks nothing like it. Ugh! (yes that's also a process failure but absent better processes I make my own process that doesn't get me flogged ;) )
  - andsoitis 3y ago
    That sounds like an opportunity to improve on collaboration (i.e. people talking, notifying each other) as well as trust ("compare with the figma board and flogg you because it looks nothing like it") For instance, if something is agreed upon and a designer changes it afterwards, they could simply give you a heads up that they intend to do so with context so the two of you can discuss. People > process.
    - tharkun__ 3y ago
      They could. They don't. It may not even be their fault. They don't know. They just change things. They live in their world. You tell them, they are sympathetic, apologize, vow to do better next time. They're in their world. They do it again. The flogging still happens. Is that broken? Yes! Does it still happen in too many companies? Yes! Is there an easy fix where you "trust but verify"? Yes! (as in, sure I trust they will notify me next time, which even if they actually do may be too late. So we made the process "figma is the 'working theory' and what we actually build will sorta look like that". Not every stakeholder may understand that but we sure will tell them when the flogging is about to start. (I say flogging, but in reality it's a gradient of course and while in some companies it will resemble an actual flogging quite closely in others it's more like what you describe. Not all countries and companies are as chill as some others ;))

spacemadness 3y ago

I feel like this is the UX designers version of “gives you enough rope to hang yourself with.”

NTARelix 3y ago

My designers take their own snapshot by cloning their work and using versions in the names of things. Older things are not to be modified with few exceptions. It makes for a good linking experience on my end, but I don't know what that kind of maintenance is like for them.

softsound 3y ago
This is my method, especially because it shows how design will progress, with tight deadlines this becomes harder but I still consider it a very valuable way of proving work (only a minor designer though with freelancing) I certainly can understand stand the move fast method of quickly changing things, when I'm doing concept work this makes more sense here. Long term though, if you actually care about your work you should be making copies or different boards to show how and when you made some decisions. Especially mayor design changes.(Granted I could just be a bad designer that just can't come up with a better workflow)

dawnerd 3y ago

Ugh yeah when designers change things after a client signs off and in the middle of implementation. It confuses everyone and no one remembers what was actually signed off.

balaji1 3y ago

Good product engineers just go with the flow - workflows with Figma is way up there, compared to without. Those folks were probably the early adopters, and they were much happier to work with designers now. Minor design details tend to change and even if they are missed out, they get caught at some point - cost of dev rework is generally manageable. Another big tool for bigger product teams has been component libraries (and corresponding Figma assets). That makes it all simpler.

alwaysbeconsing 3y ago
This is good, yes, but it requires that the team culture does not treat minor deviation from the Figma document as a bug or a failure of the developer. That mindset isn't always present, and it's not usually up to the product engineers themselves. It requires buy-in from the designers, product people, and managers.

sebazzz 3y ago

For this reason we use Zeplin, where designs are easily shared and versioned. For both developers and clients.