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

Re: [css3-color] transparency, opacity, translucency

From: Mark Kenny <beingmrkenny@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:51:04 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=thinY5JKv-_UQY7BUXmtfL-qvD7kG5pCAEMtW@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 25 February 2011 06:56, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I believe the word "transparency" is misused there. "Transparent" is
> defined in CSS Color as 'rgba(0,0,0,0)' and that fits with other English
> definitions too, in which transparent is at one end of the scale and opaque
> is at the other. The scale itself is one of translucency. "Translucent"
> usually means something between opaque (or completely opaque) and
> transparent (not opaque at all). Thus, I think the chapter should be renamed
> "Translucency: the ‘opacity’ property".
>


Actually, this isn't strictly true. The most dominant definition of
transparency conveys the meaning 'permitting the passage light so as to
allow objects to be completely visible'. So, you can have transparent blue
water, for example.

Translucency conveys the concept of diffusing light, so as to make objects
appear fuzzy. If there was a 'blur' property, which allowed things to shine
through but made them blurred and indistinct, this would would be
translucency.

M

--
Mark Kenny
Twitter: @beingmrkenny
Received on Friday, 25 February 2011 09:52:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:37 GMT