In T346168#9726054, @SGautam_WMF wrote:

I've completed the design specifications as outlined in the acceptance criteria. The Figma spec sheet has been updated accordingly. This task is now ready for the development phase.

Resolving this task since all the acceptance criteria and subtasks have been completed.

@mwilliams @DTorsani-WMF, and I met today to discuss on the simplest version of the Table's pagination for the upcoming use cases (GUC, Metrics Platform, Wishlist, etc.) and we decided on this simplified version based on the one designed by @Sarai-WMDE.

In T362791#9723694, @CCiufo-WMF wrote:

@mwilliams @bmartinezcalvo this is a duplicate of T360154. Can we pick one and consolidate them? Whichever one sticks around should be a subtask of T303320. Thank you!

This task is no longer needed since we updated the auto layout of these Figma components from 0 to -1, so there is no double border.

I think we no longer need to work on this task since the use of each library is clear. @CCiufo-WMF declining it for now, feel free to reopen if you think it's necessary.

@CCiufo-WMF during the last DST design sync we agreed on the new names for these tokens so moving this task to Up Next.

As outlined in T361734, we will use the border-color-progressive--focus for (#36c) in all the focus states of components. So there is no need to update the TextInput error-focus state, so removing it from the task description and acceptance criteria.

Following the new Constructing forms guidelines, the padding between elements within a module grouping multiple fields and/or actions should use the spacing-100 token (equivalent to 16px in the default Codex theme). So we should increase the padding between these 2 fields in the set:

@CCiufo-WMF moving this task to the sprint to work on it as we discussed during the Sprint planning.

Resolving this task since the new Guidelines have been documented in the Google doc and reviewed with the DST. I've also updated the Figma specs to match these new guidelines.

In T358736#9633849, @DTorsani-WMF wrote:

Thanks for this additional context. I wonder if this might be an opportunity to use a blue color, and having this somewhat relate to a progressive or modified in regards to adding (like in the diff colors) state of mind. @bmartinezcalvo Do you think blue would make sense here, or should we keep green and just update the value to meet accessibility criteria?