Browse DESIGN.md examples that make component rules explicit through buttons, navigation, cards, variants, and state definitions.
What To Review
Compare how teams define reusable components, state logic, emphasis levels, and naming conventions so implementation becomes less ambiguous.
What To Compare
Look for state coverage, component naming clarity, variant strategy, interaction rules, and whether the system is strong enough to support repeated UI work without ad hoc decisions.
Design Analysis
--- version: alpha name: Forest Play Space description: A nature-play design language with layered forest illustration, hand-drawn display type, muted blue-green scenery, cream story cards, rounded FAQ rows, and warm ora... --- version: alpha name: Gridded Por...
The Cozy Hollow
Home
--- version: alpha name: Forest Play Space description: A nature-play design language with layered forest illustration, hand-drawn display type, muted blue-green scenery, cream story cards, rounded FAQ rows, and warm ora...
Open exampleSaugat
Home
--- version: alpha name: Gridded Portfolio Ledger description: A minimal designer portfolio language with white ledger grids, black pill navigation, small color filter tags, large product screenshots, paper-note details,...
Open exampleKlack
Home
--- version: alpha name: Cream Tactile Utility description: A warm Mac utility design language with cream canvas, huge bold system type, dark rounded download buttons, purple highlight marks, tactile app mockups, and lar...
Open exampleCompare how teams define reusable components, state logic, emphasis levels, and naming conventions so implementation becomes less ambiguous.
A focused collection makes it easier to compare how teams describe one system concern consistently across many examples instead of mixing unrelated signals on a single page.
