W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2002

Re: X11 Colors (was Last call comments on CSS3 module: color)

From: Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 08:51:12 -0700
To: Andrew Clover <and@doxdesk.com>, <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B923817F.DD3A%tantek@cs.stanford.edu>

On 6/5/02 3:38 AM, "Andrew Clover" <and@doxdesk.com> wrote:

> Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
>> It is true that in order to deprecate a feature, a replacement should be
>> suggested.  For the moment we suggest using rgb (or hsl) colors, until as
>> such a time that a better color naming scheme is discussed and developed.
> I already consider rgb/hsl a better alternative than a naming scheme as weak
> as X11's! Some of the suggestions for naming schemes made here are
> interesting, but for now at least I would prefer no new naming scheme at
> all to X11COLORS.

Indeed - hence why there needs to be more discussion if we are to attempt to
adopt an improved color naming scheme at all in the future.

> In my view the named colours are used for two purposes:
> 1) to provide a more readable version of certain very often-used colours
>    such as black and white, red, blue, a couple of greys, etc.
> 2) to allow authors to quickly write a colour where the exact shade does not
>    matter, in particular for testing purposes.


> IMO the 16 named colours already available are sufficient for the second
> purpose,

There has been a proposal (with two additional supporters) to also allow
'orange'.  Please let me know if you object to that.

> and the extra colours available in the X11 set do not help the first
> purpose as they are neither very commonly-used shades nor, for the
> most part, very readable, thanks to their poor naming.

Many seem to share these opinions as well.  Please let me know if you object
to officially deprecating the remaining X11 named colors.


Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2002 11:46:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:02 UTC