W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2011

Re: [css] Proposal: making Shorthand Hex Colors even shorter (16 grayscale shades)

From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:41:52 +1000
Message-ID: <4E37F090.7000009@css-class.com>
To: Antony Kennedy <antony@silversquid.com>
CC: Markus Bruch <macinfo@arcor.de>, CSS 3 W3C Group <www-style@w3.org>
On 2/08/2011 10:23 PM, Antony Kennedy wrote:
> On 2 Aug 2011, at 11:54, Alan Gresley wrote:

>> Possibly but it would be not rgb() anymore. You would want
>> grayscale() but this is counter to saving bandwidth. Possibly gs()
>> with a range of '0' to '255'. I presume you are thinking of using
>> this on handheld devices.
>
> I'm not sure why it wouldn't be rgb(). rgb(100) would be the same as
> rgb(100,100,100)  it would still have values for all three channels.
> gs() or gray() both offer more clarity, though. Yes, for handheld
> devices or just as a best practise, for reducing bandwidth and file
> sizes.
>
> AK


It would have to be gs() or gray() for forward compatibility since 
rgb(100) or something similar has to throw a parsing error since it is 
an invalid value in rgb().




-- 
Alan Gresley
http://css-3d.org/
http://css-class.com/
Received on Tuesday, 2 August 2011 12:42:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:43 GMT