UX Tables

Tables & Lists Skill

How this skill behaves (read first)

This is a generative skill. The default failure modes: decoration over data (heavy borders, zebra everything, centered text, mixed formats), missing manipulation (no sorting, no customization — fatal at real data volumes), and density extremes (cramped 32px rows or wasteful spacing). A table's only job is letting users scan, compare, and act on data — every visual choice either serves that or fights it. This skill gates:

1. Establish the data shape and tasks — 2-D comparison (table) vs. 1-D scanning (list), volume, and what users do with rows.
2. Apply the always-true core — alignment rules, hierarchy, formats, interaction states.
3. Surface the context-dependent decisions (density, pagination type, customization, list variants) with trade-offs.

Then it hands off to ux-heuristics-audit, ux-accessibility-audit, ux-aesthetics-audit, and ux-microcopy-audit for validation.

Step 0 — Establish context before designing

Ask if not known; state the assumption if proceeding without an answer:

• Table or list? Multi-attribute comparison across columns → table. One item per row scanned linearly (emails, results, settings) → list. Simple-table content often reads better as a list — and lists are easier for screen-reader users.
• Data volume and growth — tens of rows need none of the machinery; thousands need sorting, filtering, pagination, items-per-page, search.
• What do users do with rows? Read-only, single-row actions (inline ⋮ menu), bulk operations (multi-select checkboxes), or editing — each adds specific UI.
• Density tolerance — data-dense ops tools (condensed 40px rows) vs. consumer comfort (regular 48px / relaxed 56px).

The always-apply core (correct for almost every case)

Alignment and formatting (the silent rules everyone breaks)

• Text left-aligned (LTR), matching the reading direction.
• Numbers right-aligned, in tabular figures (equal-width digits) — that's what makes columns of numbers comparable at a glance.
• One consistent format per column — never "22.04.2018" next to "4.6.2018"; one date, currency, and unit format throughout.
• Legible sans-serif typeface; column margins wide enough to scan, compare, and edit comfortably.

Hierarchy without noise

• Headers visibly distinct (weight, slightly darker background) but not shouting; never empty header cells — including the top-left one.
• Borders are a last resort: minimal lines beat grid-everything. Horizontal dividers only when row spacing is tight or tables are very long; zebra striping for wide, dense data sets.
• Overflow handled explicitly: truncate with ellipsis + tooltip for full text, resizable columns, or hideable/reorderable columns.

Interaction (what makes it a tool, not a picture)

• Sorting on every meaningful column — alphabetical, numeric, date, ascending/descending. Non-negotiable at volume.
• Hover state + selected state on rows — users lose their place in uniform rows without them.
• Row actions hidden until hover (or behind an inline ⋮ menu — see ux-menus); bulk-action checkboxes always visible, with bulk actions appearing on selection.
• Toolbar above the table for search, filter, export, print when the data warrants it.
• Links look like links — recognizable styling, distinct from body text, hover feedback.

Lists: structure and loading

• Type from content: single-line (names, settings) → multi-line (email: sender + subject + preview) → rich (media + actions) → image list (galleries) → nested (hierarchies, with clear indentation) → ordered only when sequence matters.
• Vertical beats horizontal — fewer eye movements, natural scrolling; horizontal lists only for short, non-scrolling sets.
• Keyline alignment: text and icons aligned to invisible vertical guides; thumbnails left; control elements (checkboxes, menus) right; text vertically centered against images.
• Dividers when items span 3+ lines (email-style); indented dividers for lists with thumbnails; otherwise white space.
• Loading: skeleton screens loading sequentially top-to-bottom — not a fullscreen spinner.

The context-dependent decisions (surface, don't auto-apply)

Validate the result (orchestration)

Hand-offs name each lens by its installable skill name. Invoke one only if that skill is installed; if it isn't, this skill's own core already carries these rules — proceed without it rather than blocking.

After generating or revising, hand the result to the audit lenses rather than declaring it done. These are candidate lenses — posture is set by docs/orchestration-policy.md, or route the whole thing through ux-design-review. Here, heuristics and microcopy are Tier A (auto-run); accessibility, aesthetics, and mobile-responsiveness are Tier B (offered) — under an existing design system aesthetics is suppressed and accessibility narrows to usage; mobile-responsiveness applies only on mobile. If the user invoked this skill for one specific thing, respect that scope.

• ux-heuristics-audit (Tier A) — visibility of state (sort direction, selection), user control (customization, items-per-page), consistency of formats.
• ux-accessibility-audit (Tier B — offer; narrow under a design system) — semantic structure (real <table>, <th> + scope, captions; list markup for lists), header completeness, proportional widths, link contrast — assistive tech depends on markup this skill specifies.
• ux-aesthetics-audit (Tier B — offer; suppress under a design system) — border/zebra restraint, density rhythm, alignment discipline.
• ux-microcopy-audit (Tier A) — header label clarity and brevity, empty-state and toolbar wording.
• ux-mobile-responsiveness-audit (Tier B — offer; applies only on mobile) — when the context is mobile: responsive list adaptation, column collapsing strategy.

If the audits surface a conflict (e.g., brand styling vs. scannability), resolve back toward the primary task: users come to compare and find — decoration that slows a scan is a defect.

Common do/don't patterns

Source lessons (Uxcel)

• When & How to Use Tables in UIs
• Best Practices for Designing Tables in UIs
• Tables & Lists Accessibility
• UI Lists & When to Use Them
• Best Practices for Designing Lists