"If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail."
Not enough information is being provided to developers to get from "Point A" to "Point B". Chris has built several sites in the past two months where either no/incomplete mobile design was provided, or only a mobile design of a home page was provided.
This is not good. There are too many things that happen in between a small screen and a large screen to skip this part of the process. Don should be able to attest to this based on some of the issues that arose with the Residences at Capital Crescent website although, in all fairness, those issues were more for middle screen sizes (which aren't even on Millennium's radar).
The web department can not get projects from point A to point B if we don't have any idea where point A is. So, we usually have to make an on-the-spot decision as to what that is. This should be part of the design process, not the development process.
I would argue that interior page mobile comps are more important than a home page comp. The home page is only one page of a site. Why would we make design decisions for the entire site, based on that one page that is totally different from all of the others?
I get it. Time is money. Projects have budgets. While a mobile comp of all interior pages would be fantastic, we're only asking for one that is "kind of" represenative of most of the content in a site. Something we can use to pull font faces/sizes, margins, colors, etc. from.
It's 2019. Adobe Photoshop is not (and frankly never was) the right tool for the job.
Some good overview articles on XD, its features, and how it compares to other modern design tools:
- Will Adobe XD kill Sketch and InVision?
- Design Tool Showdown – Adobe XD vs. Sketch (2019)
- Handoff Design Specs. (This is a really awesome feature!)
- Adobe XD Crash Course
Benefits of using a style guide: