W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 1997

RE: RGB vs HSL -- color standard for CSS

From: Braden N. McDaniel <braden@shadow.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 17:42:14 -0500
Message-Id: <199712052241.RAA09011@mail.shadow.net>
To: "'Sue Jordan'" <sjacct@worldnet.att.net>, "'Daniel McFarlane'" <mcfarlan@itd.nrl.navy.mil>, <www-style@w3.org>, "'Steven Pemberton'" <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-style-request@w3.org [SMTP:www-style-request@w3.org]On Behalf
> Of Sue Jordan
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 1997 1:19 PM
> To: Daniel McFarlane; www-style@w3.org; Steven Pemberton
> Subject: Re: RGB vs HSL -- color standard for CSS
> Daniel McFarlane wrote:
> > 
> > CSS Committee,
> For what it's worth, this is a list, not a CSS Committee.
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Please adopt the HSL convention for specifying color instead of RGB.
> > 
> > I agree with Steven Pemberton (CWI, Amsterdam) that HSL would improve
> > the usability of the CSS standard.
> Some of us who have subscribed to this list for the express
> purpose of discussing current and proposed developments in
> CSS fail to see any viable purpose in the deluge of 'me,
> too' postings concerning the adoption of HSL in lieu of
> RGB.  Understanding full well that Dr. Pemberton solicited
> these responses both by private e-mail and by posting to
> comp.human-factors, I question his motivation.  I'll never
> know what it was, however, since my killfile will now
> include subject/HSL and sender/Pemberton.
> Eric Meyer (re:HSL Troll) is certainly not alone in his
> expressed irritation at this incessant spamming.  Some of us
> are more vocal than others.

Perhaps most irritating is the fact that the bulk of these posters seem to be terribly uninformed as to what actually *is* in CSS, and oblivious to the existence of the RGB functional notation.


Received on Friday, 5 December 1997 17:41:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:46 UTC