zlacker

>>emilsj+(OP)
The problem with these kind of pixel-perfect, inspectable design tools, is that there's no distinction between important details and unimportant details.

For example, if our app uses a letter-spacing of 1.2 for all the body text, and your Figma design uses a letter-spacing of 1.25, is that important? Or is that a mistake?

In something like Figma, being consistent is difficult for designers. But in code, being consistent is the default — exceptions are hard for developers!

There's a fundamental mismatch that just ends up being painful all around.

"The map is not the territory." Trying to get a design doc to 100% accuracy is often a waste of time. Design tools need a way to specify which details are important, and which are not.

>>natero+rD1
To be honest Figma gives plenty of tools to solve this problem. With various reusable components, font/color/sizing templates etc. Its reasonably easy to be extremely consistent with your measurements in figma, as long as designers spend the time to learn the tool, and not just use it like photoshop / illustrator.

Even resizability can be done quite well, allowing the designers to create reusable bits that stretch and squeeze to fit the needed space, and the way they deformed can be easily read (and verified!)