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

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

From: Benjamin D. Gray <bdgray@gcomputer.net>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 17:31:44 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <65685200AF3BE8418427361347397230142FDC@POSTOFFICE.uwyo.edu>
To: <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>

I say, remove X11 Colors from CSS3 and SVG1.1 (or at least depreciate
them).

Benjamin D. Gray
WCIS Career Portfolio Web Developer
http://uwyo.edu/wcis/portfolio/



On 5/27/02 3:26 PM, "fantasai" <fantasai@escape.com> wrote:

>> As Steven Pemberton has pointed out, the process of deprecation does 
>> exist to gradually get rid of language features no longer desired. If

>> codifying X11 colors into CSS3 is necessary, then do so and deprecate

>> them,

>A reasonable proposal - but I will not deprecate them in CSS3 unless
the SVG working group also
>deprecates in SVG 1.1.

>In fact, everyone who feels strongly against the X11 colors should
forward their posts to
>www-svg@w3.org (cc'd), and request that SVG 1.1 deprecate (or remove -
depending on your
> opinion) them as well.

>> as HTML 4 did with many HTML features. What compelling argument 
>> prevents this route?

>Consistency between specs.  Were SVG 1.1 to deprecate the X11 colors,
then it would make
>perfect sense to deprecate them in CSS3 Color.

>> If you think X11 name support is important for the future, then I 
>> recommend you take Kynn's suggestion and separate it out of raw color

>> values with functional notation. This leaves the syntax open to
better 
>> naming schemes CSS may want to adopt in the future.

>Either the X11 colors should be advocated as is, or they should be
deprecated as is.
>I don't think it makes any sense to go with introducing a new syntax
for something you
>want deprecated.

>Tantek
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 15:11:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:14 GMT