I need to test on what I usually call UI design consistency: namely, the relation between a design and its implementation, considering only the visual aspects, leaving out any other consideration. One example is when clients ask for "pixel perfect" implementation.

So, it's basically a visual QA. The term is a direct translation for what we use in Spanish, so I thought it was correct

Today I was talking to an English speaking UX team and when the term came aloud, I discovered everybody named it in different ways and while we all understood what were we talking about, there wasn't a single way to name it.

So my question is: does this testing modality have a naming convention in English? If so, which one?

  • QA here :) This is not that hard as long as design is in the same resolution and on the same version of particular browser. You can automatically take screenshot of developed app and compare them pixel by pixel with the design. Check if this can resolve your question: sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/18340/…
    – RadekE
    Commented Jan 17, 2019 at 11:42

3 Answers 3


Sometimes this would be called design verification testing. Meaning you are verifying that the system has been implemented according to the design.


'Design QA' is the term I have experienced most frequently.

I don't have any data on this (other than my multiple experiences), but 'Visual QA' can miss several aspects when seeking to finesse a product.

No matter the name, design QA spans several dimensions

We divide Design QA into 3 layers, so you can check consistency across three dimensions:

  • Visual: this is the aesthetic / presentation layer. 'Is there fidelity to the visual standards that the style guidelines present?'
  • Behavior / Interactions: This is the behavioral layer. 'Are we implementing familiar patterns across similar interactions. Are concepts being applied consistency to match user expectations?'
  • Nomenclature / writing / voice: -'Do we have the same names for concepts enforced across different views? Is the voice and tone consistent?'

Separation of QA passes allows for looking for one thing at a time

If you separate these into 'passes', you don't try to look for everything at the same time; it's hard to split attention among all the dimensions that make a quality product in one go.

This also allows you to assign different experts to the task: i.e. a dedicated writer is much more attuned to nomenclature than a UI (visually focused) designer.

  • Thank you Mike, great answer as usual. However, it doesn't answer my question, it's kind of my problem. I mean, I know (more or less) everything you mention in your answer, but the problem persists: is there a single (accepted, documented) way to call what you mention as your first dimension? Maybe there's not and that's what I'm wondering. Either way, great answer +1
    – Devin
    Commented Jan 5, 2019 at 21:45

When I read the question I was thinking that this is not really a design QA test if your organisation has a design system in place, because it would be simply verifying that the code has been implemented correctly.

However, like most design teams that probably doesn't work with a robust design system, I think the process of ensuring branding and visual consistency isn't as strict as a QA process, but rather a review of the look & feel to make sure that it is aligned with the branding and visual style guidelines.

Therefore, I would suggest that it is a design review rather than a QA or testing process, unless you have a design system that you are verifying the correct implementation of.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.