Has panel--inverse been implemented? The style isn't appearing on either Beta or Live.

[TrishB70]

[wa-rren-dev]

So there's a panel--impact which is similar? We possibly have a slight deviation in our naming which we can address.

If you go to https://design-system.nice.org.uk/storybook/?path=/story/panel--try-it-out and click on "knobs" (I know) then you can test the three current variants via the select list.

[wa-rren-dev]

[TrishB70]

Impact is perfect. Actually better.

[wa-rren-dev]

Also I notice it's not the standard teal background, it's one of the other ones. I think we should have a standard inverse style as well so let me know if you agree and I'll put it in the backlog.

[TrishB70]

A standard inverse would be useful. And the background of --impact should ideally be the same as for the Hero container: #18646e? It looks odd currently (#517489).

[ediblecode]

Possibly v1 removed --inverse which might be a regression. We did do some rationalisation on panels to get the 3:

• default (grey, used for supporting info)
• impact which is teal(ish) background
• and primary which is white background and teal(ish) thick border

Looks like --inverse was in v0 (see https://nice-digital.github.io/nice-design-system/components/panel/#default-light-panel) but not sure what happened to it. Also not sure its use-case over the other panels: maybe it's just for asthetic purposes? If we can articulate a clear use-case for an inverse then I'm all for it as a 4th panel type. Hope that helps?

[ediblecode]

the background of --impact should ideally be the same as for the Hero container:

I think it's actually deliberately different to avoid teal overload!

[TrishB70]

Yes there was mention of Teal overload! But having an off-teal colour doesn't really work either. To my eye it looks odd. The two teals are clashing. That's the designer in me. --inverse was a very dark grey which worked.

[ediblecode]

But having an off-teal colour doesn't really work either. To my eye it looks odd. The two teals are clashing.

sounds like that's something to look at too then.

But --inverse was a very dark grey which worked

cool let's re-add this in then

[wa-rren-dev]

@TrishB70 @ediblecode Just moved this to a discussion.

If we decide what we're doing I'll create an issue for it.

Are we going to:

• Create --inverse variant as a dark gray
• Re-colour impact to the main teal? Or do we know that --impact is out there somewhere that might have an undesirable effect?

[ediblecode]

Create --inverse variant as a dark gray

Yeah, I think so.

Re-colour impact to the main teal?

Not sure. I'd favour keeping it as-is TBH, or explore one of the other blue-shades from the brand palette. It's probably an issue on pages with a big teal block like the homepage or find guidance. And if we have other panel types we can use there it might not be so much of an issue. What do you think?

[wa-rren-dev]

Created an issue for this here #161

[ediblecode]

We did. Those are the 3 that are documented at https://design-system.nice.org.uk/storybook/?path=/story/panel--default-supporting:

• default panel for supporting info
• impact (blue3) for main call to action
• primary to group or separate content
  Those are all still valid I think, the question is whether we need extra styles?

[gaynorc]

Ah, I didn't realise that there's a difference between the design system pages and storybook. That's my oversight.
I think we need to talk about this within our team. We need to work out if the panels we'd agreed don't meet our needs, or if we're changing that based on an edge case. Either way I think we need to get consensus as a group on what we need.
Can we hold off on this for a few days while I get everyone together.

[ediblecode]

Yes, makes sense - if you're happy to have that conversation

[ediblecode]

And @gaynorc sorry we need to update the docs for https://design-system.nice.org.uk/components/panel/ - it's missing those new panel types

[wa-rren-dev]

I'm going to lock this discussion, two new variants are going through code review now, examples of them are here #161 . @gaynorc @TrishB70 Any new variants you'd like, just open a new discussion!