Applying excessive border-radius (over-rounding) to large containers, creating dated, overly rounded aesthetics that look unprofessional, when moderate rounding (8-16px) typically looks more modern and appropriate for larger elements, while excessive rounding (30px+) can make large containers appear cartoonish or outdated.
Mixing border-radius units inconsistently across components (some px, some %, some rem), creating visual inconsistency and maintenance difficulties, when consistent unit choice across similar components maintains design system coherence and makes global adjustments easier to implement systematically.
Forgetting directional consistency in design systems, using different border-radius patterns for similar components without clear rationale, when consistent rounding patterns (all cards use same radius, all buttons use same radius) create visual harmony and professional appearance across interfaces.
Using only pixel units when components need responsive behavior, causing border-radius to not scale appropriately with element size or viewport, when percentage or relative units (rem, em) provide responsive scaling that maintains appropriate rounding proportions across different screen sizes and component scales.
Not matching border-radius to component size proportions, applying large radius values to tiny components or small radius values to large containers, when proportional rounding (larger elements = larger radius, smaller elements = smaller radius) creates better visual balance and professional appearance.
Ignoring border-radius in design system token structure, using arbitrary radius values throughout components instead of standardized tokens, when tokenized radius values (sm, md, lg, xl) ensure consistency, make global changes easier, and maintain design system integrity across all rounded components.
Applying uniform border-radius when asymmetric corners are needed for design intent (speech bubbles, directional elements), when individual corner control allows precise corner treatment that matches design requirements, creating more nuanced and intentional rounded corner effects for specific component types.
Not testing border-radius appearance at different component sizes or responsive breakpoints, assuming radius values work identically across all contexts, when responsive testing ensures border-radius appears appropriate and proportional across different viewport sizes and component scale variations.
Using elliptical border-radius unnecessarily when uniform radius would suffice, adding complexity without design benefit, when uniform radius is simpler and more maintainable unless specific oval/pill shapes or asymmetric effects are actually required by the design specification.
Forgetting to consider border-radius in component accessibility, using excessive rounding that might affect focus indicators or interactive element appearance, when border-radius should complement accessibility features (focus outlines, hover states) without interfering with interactive element usability.
Not exporting border-radius values for design system documentation, keeping radius values scattered in individual component code, when centralized radius tokens or design system documentation ensures team consistency, simplifies onboarding, and makes design system maintenance more manageable.
Assuming all browsers handle border-radius identically without testing, when while modern browsers support border-radius consistently, edge cases or specific percentage calculations may vary slightly, requiring testing across target browsers to ensure consistent appearance and avoiding vendor prefix requirements (not needed for modern browsers).