レイアウトの「サイジング・カオス」問題：サイズ指定でハマっていませんか？

元の投稿には本文が含まれていませんが、このタイトルはUI開発やインフラ設計における「サイズ指定（sizing）」が複雑になりすぎて、収拾がつかなくなっている状況を端的に表しています。レスポンシブデザインの崩れや、予期せぬスケーリングの問題など、エンジニアを悩ませる「サイジングの泥沼」について注目が集まっています。

This is a great use of data to make a compelling case that sizing sucks for women's clothing!

I do wish it attempted to answer the question at the end, though: "Sizes are all made up anyway — why can’t we make them better?"

Like, why doesn't the market solve for this? If the median woman can't buy clothing that fits in many brands, surely that's a huge marketing opportunity for any of the thousands of other clothing brands?

This is, to be clear, a sincere question - not a veiled argument against OP or anything! It seems like there are probably some structural or psychological or market forces stopping that from happening and I'd love to understand them. Same with the "womens clothes have no pockets" thing!

I might have missed this in the scroll format but is there any reason not to drop the qualitative size names and just use an actual dimension or two?

Interesting visualizations, but I don't understand what the thesis is. To me, the conclusion says:

1. Luxury fashion thrives on exclusivity, which is exclusionary.

2. Clothing size standards do not match diverse body types.

3. There is no sizing standard, and companies size however they want.

"The average woman’s waistline today is nearly 4 inches wider than it was in the mid-1990s."

I assume they mean circumference rather than diameter, but this is still a shocking increase in only 30 years. I knew the obesity epidemic was an ever-increasing problem, but this really puts it into perspective. I wonder if we'll ever fully understand the causes behind this rapid shift.

At a previous employer this was a problem we identified (and larger retailer customers) had recognised, although for other reasons reasons. We had developed a size recommendation system for them, that used real product measurements in every size and a method of obtaining your body measurements from fully clothed photos. We also offered a statistical average measurement set for those who couldn’t/wouldn’t take photos of themselves (privacy was important to us, and there was no need to undress).

We were able to give details about fit comfort across many measurements for each size, but this feature was basically unused. 99% of users used the statistical average body of themselves instead of themselves, which actually exacerbates the body type problem.

Another interesting thing about the industry and the grading process we learned; many retailers had no measurements for their own clothes except the reference size. This was much more common of higher end brands.

1 last thing; some global brands actually have the same size name on the same product represent a different size in different region (eg an SKU in size S in US may have different measurements to the same SKU in S in Asia)

If we can have mass produced fast fashion from runway to store in weeks...

Why not tailored clothing at scale? Have a set of portable body measurements that can be sent to any retailer - make an order and have it sent from factory to door in a week or two.

Or get a size that is close enough - bring it to your neighborhood tailor. Most alterations are simple and not very expensive.

Unfortunately sizing is just a leaky abstraction. You are trying to distill many variables into a single dimension. It will never be particularly great.

Men's clothes have gone through the same process over the course of my lifetime. For instance, I wear the same brand and size of jeans that I did in college. The waist size back then was broadly accurate to the actual size in inches, but today, thirty years on, I weigh ~20lbs more, and that waist "measurement" has up-sized along with me. I guess it's meant to flatter me, but is it really fooling anyone? I guess, based on other's comments in this thread, that it does, and vanity sizing works, which is just sad.

(Then there are men's "relaxed" fits, which bear even less relationship to actual measurements. Maybe "slim" sizing is closer to the old system? Even when they fit my waist - like, six nominal inches bigger than standard! I'm not that much wider - they don't fit my legs, so I don't know.)

None of that's anywhere close to as ridiculous as women's sizing, but give 'em time and I'm sure it will be.

The issue is not the sizes, the issue is the obesity epidemic. According to CDC [1] the average woman in the US is 5'3" weighing 172lbs. That's not just overweight but rather first degree of obesity. I guess you could argue that sizes should catch up to the demands when half of your population is straight up fat but I feel like a better angle would be educating people that 1500 kcal worth of Starbucks sugar for breakfast is not healthy.

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/body-measurements.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/body-measurements.htm)

As a short adult male (5'5" - 165cm), it's always been difficult to find pants or jeans with a 28" inseam. Surprisingly, AmazonBasics line of clothes is one of the few mass produced consumer brands that has this size. Niche alternatives like Peter Manning are expensive, so it's great Amazon does this.