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

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

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 19:15:04 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: David Chambers <david.chambers.05@gmail.com>, Chris Nager <cnager@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9710FCC2E88860489239BE0308AC5D170450C158@TK5EX14MBXC264.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
I think it predates IE5 by quite a bit, but any-who...

My point was that there are multiple ways to interpret less than 3 hex digits (as well as 4 and 5), so I think it's a bit foolish to introduce an additional incompatibility for an arguably ambiguous representation.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 10:54 AM
To: Brian Manthos
Cc: David Chambers; Chris Nager; www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [css] Proposal: making Shorthand Hex Colors even shorter (16 grayscale shades)

On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com> wrote:
> In IE5, “#12” was treated as the same as “#120” IIRC.  Cases like “#1234”
> also have interesting treatment.
> So, compatibility is one concern.

Is this only in HTML color attributes like <body bgcolor>?  Those are
required now to use a different parsing algorithm than CSS anyway (I
fixed WebKit to stop treating it like CSS).

IE5 compat is probably the farthest thing from an average author's
mind, as well.  ^_^


Received on Thursday, 1 December 2011 19:15:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:35:00 UTC