To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Isn't the definition of skeumorphism specifically "Adding design elements that have no purpose except to look like something else" - like the modillions in classic greek architecture that are meant to look like the ends of wooden beams, but are completely superficial in a stone temple? (In other words, a design variant of what biology would call a vestigial element).
Abstracted down to the basics, a checkbox is just a way to say "you can make a selection here" and "you have selected this" - and nothing about that is vestigial; you need both parts, and they can't be made much simpler than a box and a mark. The form itself is inspired by a paper variant, sure - but skeumorphism would be to add elements that only served a purpose on paper.
Edited 2013-02-14 11:34 UTC




Member since:
2011-04-25
In some cases, not in all. In the former, they are using terminology ineffectively and aren't helping their case. In the latter, they are making an extreme case that is not well supported.
No, Skeuomorphism is not the extreme at the end of the continuum -- it is it's own whole spectrum. There are innumerable instances of skeuomorphism even in "flat" designs like Metro and Holo.
Why is it a checkmark at all? It could be yes/no text, or a red or green circle, or any number of non-analogous objects. Why a checkmark instead of a tick, or a dot, or an X (which it may be)? Yes, trying to make a reference to something that you are already familiar with in some other context is the definition of skeuomorphism. Whether the analog is very close to its digital counterpart or not very similar at all doesn't change that it is skeuomorphism.