W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Minutes, Wednesday April 22, 2009

From: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 23:51:30 +1000
Message-Id: <U59IIK.4VE4HHE6L9DI@abbra.com>
To: "public-svg-wg@w3.org" <public-svg-wg@w3.org>

Hi All,

	In regard to SVG Color:

--Original Message--:
>
><snip/>
>    CL: I don't know
>    ... some of them allow negative colors to express out of gamut
>    colours
>
>    <ChrisL> fairly sure that some allow > 1.0 for headroom; believe
>    trhat some cms allow negative values and others clip
>
>    CM: I think 0 to 1 makes more sense
>
>    CL: Which would be compatible with what 1.1 says
>    ... values greater than 1 or less than 0 would be out of the profile
>    gamut but no necessarily out of the target gamut
>    ... I'd be fine with that
>
>    RESOLUTION: A float in the range 0 to 1 like SVG 1.1 and no
>    Scientific notation
>
>conformance

Fluorescent colours require values > 1. So conformance-wise
the resolution is OK, but implementations should be free to
represent values > 1 and < 0.

Also, the resolution for no scientific notation is a bit silly.
It's OK to not require it for conformance, but if an implementation
chooses to parse scientific values that are in the 0->1 range, then
it should be allowed (BTW, I do).

Alex
Received on Wednesday, 22 April 2009 13:52:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 22 April 2009 13:52:09 GMT