W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2010

Re: [css3-color] #rrggbbaa annotation

From: Alberto Lepe <dev@alepe.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 13:42:03 +0900
Message-ID: <t2n8c9249b71004052142uba0a503qaec9e89342456489@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> If the working group agrees, are you volunteering to join the
> working group and do the administrative work described above to push
> this spec through another last call with this addition?
>
> -David

I know what you mean. It is very easy to propose but not so many
people are willing to really participate. But you can count on me!
I agree with Tab Atkins. If its too complicated to be added in CSS3
specifications, I think it should be added in CSS4. The only thing
that worries me is that CSS4 looks very far away in time to be
released. But in the other hand, as this feature is quite simple in
implementation and definition, maybe browsers won't delay so much in
adding it, don't you think?

This is how Google defines the #rrggbbaa annotation:
http://code.google.com/apis/chart/docs/chart_params.html#gcharts_rgb
and this is how is defined in 3DMLW:     http://www.3dmlw.com/?id=10976

Most of the other #rrggbbaa definitions I found are much more
simpler... something like: "... #RRGGBBAA in which AA represents the
alpha channel, being 00 totally transparent and FF totally opaque."

In the case of css-color module, I think it should be added under
"4.2.2 RGBA color values" in a similar way as it is introduced in the
"4.2.1 RGB color values" section.

Introducing #RRGGBBAA should not break anything in its implementation
as it will still valid for older versions:
"Note. If RGBA values are not supported by a user agent, they should
be treated like unrecognized values per the CSS forward compatibility
parsing rules. RGBA values must not be treated as simply an RGB value
with the opacity ignored. "

Lepe
Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 04:42:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:26 GMT