{ "_description": "本文件由 data/ 生成：请改动来源文件，不要改这里。各字段的证据边界见接入指南。", "schemaVersion": "1.0.0", "kind": "list", "locale": "zh-CN", "id": "P-Y", "name": { "zh": "原则与认知机制 · 2026 关注", "en": "Principles & cognition · 2026 focus" }, "headline": { "zh": "2026 UX 原则趋势：九大值得关注的设计原则", "en": "2026 Trending UX Principles: Top 9 Design Principles in 2026" }, "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/P-Y/", "self": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/P-Y.json", "alternates": { "zh-CN": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/P-Y.json", "en": "https://designvocabulary.com/en/lists/P-Y.json" }, "site": { "catalogSchemaVersion": "0.1.0", "entries": 158, "index": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/index.json", "query": "https://designvocabulary.com/api/query?lang=zh", "guide": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/agents/", "llms": "https://designvocabulary.com/llms.txt" }, "provenance": { "selection": "editorial", "ordered": false, "disclaimer": "席位号是编辑位置，不是评分、排名或人气统计；清单未收满时保持原样，不补足。", "titleNote": "标题中的“趋势”与“N 大”是检索用语：本版记录的是编辑观察到的讨论方向，不是采用率、热度或排名统计。", "seatOrigins": { "issue-1-ledger": "席位来自计划 issue #1 的清单账本。", "editorial-reconstruction": "席位由本仓库编辑判断补上。" }, "evidence": "行业展望表达的是从业者关注点，不是效果证明；可访问性规范给出的是可检验的最低要求，不是设计质量的全部。", "nominalSize": 10, "seatCount": 9, "filled": false, "sibling": { "id": "P-C", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/P-C/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/P-C.json" } }, "seats": [ { "seat": 2, "entry": "visibility-of-system-status", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "当系统会自行动作时，这条原则的负担明显变重。", "name": "系统状态可见性", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/visibility-of-system-status/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/visibility-of-system-status.json" }, { "seat": 3, "entry": "consistency", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "在年度语境里，自然语言入口让“同一说法指同一件事”更难保证。", "name": "一致性与标准", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/consistency/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/consistency.json" }, { "seat": 4, "entry": "error-prevention", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "在年度语境里对应“在自动动作生效前拦住它”。", "name": "错误预防", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/error-prevention/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/error-prevention.json" }, { "seat": 5, "entry": "user-control", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "在年度语境里对应“人能中止、能回退系统已经做的事”。", "name": "用户控制与自由", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/user-control/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/user-control.json" }, { "seat": 6, "entry": "contrast-legibility", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上可量化检查的一条，说明低对比是可测的问题，不是一种风格名称。", "name": "对比与可读性", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/contrast-legibility/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/contrast-legibility.json" }, { "seat": 7, "entry": "cognitive-load", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上“负荷从哪里来、哪一部分可以由设计减少”的分析框架。", "name": "认知负荷", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/cognitive-load/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/cognitive-load.json" }, { "seat": 8, "entry": "trust-calibration", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上“信任应与真实可靠性相称”，明确目标不是一味提高信任。", "name": "信任校准", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/trust-calibration/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/trust-calibration.json" }, { "seat": 9, "entry": "explainability", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上“给出使用者能核对的理由与限制”，不等同于让界面可识别。", "name": "可解释性", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/explainability/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/explainability.json" }, { "seat": 10, "entry": "perceivable-alternatives", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上按感知通道提供等价替代的要求，比包容性设计更具体可检查。", "name": "可感知的等价替代", "type": "principle", "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/perceivable-alternatives/", "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/perceivable-alternatives.json" } ], "list": { "id": "P-Y", "category": "principle", "edition": "2026-focus", "name": { "zh": "原则与认知机制 · 2026 关注", "en": "Principles & cognition · 2026 focus" }, "headline": { "zh": "2026 UX 原则趋势：九大值得关注的设计原则", "en": "2026 Trending UX Principles: Top 9 Design Principles in 2026" }, "note": "2026 年编辑关注的原则议题，偏向可解释性、信任与可感知性。", "keywords": [ "2026 UX 趋势", "趋势设计原则", "可解释性设计", "信任校准", "可访问性", "认知负荷", "AI 设计原则" ], "lead": "这一版记录 2026 年编辑关注的原则议题，集中在三处：结果是否可以被核对、对系统的信任是否与其真实可靠性相称、以及信息是否对不同感知通道都成立。", "criteria": [ "2026 年前后有可核实的规范、行业展望或研究在讨论它。", "它能落到可检查的判断上，不停留在价值宣示。", "与同类既有原则的差别可以说清楚。" ], "pairing": "与《原则与认知机制 · 经典基础》相比，这一版更多针对自动生成结果的判断；重合的条目说明老原则在这一语境下负担更重。", "evidence": "行业展望表达的是从业者关注点，不是效果证明；可访问性规范给出的是可检验的最低要求，不是设计质量的全部。", "seats": [ { "seat": 2, "entry": "visibility-of-system-status", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "当系统会自行动作时，这条原则的负担明显变重。" }, { "seat": 3, "entry": "consistency", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "在年度语境里，自然语言入口让“同一说法指同一件事”更难保证。" }, { "seat": 4, "entry": "error-prevention", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "在年度语境里对应“在自动动作生效前拦住它”。" }, { "seat": 5, "entry": "user-control", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "在年度语境里对应“人能中止、能回退系统已经做的事”。" }, { "seat": 6, "entry": "contrast-legibility", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上可量化检查的一条，说明低对比是可测的问题，不是一种风格名称。" }, { "seat": 7, "entry": "cognitive-load", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上“负荷从哪里来、哪一部分可以由设计减少”的分析框架。" }, { "seat": 8, "entry": "trust-calibration", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上“信任应与真实可靠性相称”，明确目标不是一味提高信任。" }, { "seat": 9, "entry": "explainability", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上“给出使用者能核对的理由与限制”，不等同于让界面可识别。" }, { "seat": 10, "entry": "perceivable-alternatives", "origin": "issue-1-ledger", "reason": "补上按感知通道提供等价替代的要求，比包容性设计更具体可检查。" } ] } }