W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Color tweaking functions

From: Pete Boere <pete@the-echoplex.net>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:14:20 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKZZz6eBmbZ7Kc=GK1qeso9z9PEbAkZ5UFm2x7bifVvHM-R6Zg@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Your examples are manipulating technical parameters.  I would expect
designers to be interested in subjective behaviour, and therefore want to
specify the literal values that are subjectively right, not some
algorithmic approximation.

The fact that color tweaking functions exist in every preprocessor I can
think of indicates that relative values are of interest to designers.
Colors are chosen by eye after all.


The over the wire cost of these examples would be higher than sending the
literal, i.e. a preprocessor would be better.

A few extra bytes in a few places.



On 21 January 2012 10:24, David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk> wrote:

> Pete Boere wrote:
>
>> Are there any plans to implement color 'tweaking' functions in css?
>>
>>
> Your examples are manipulating technical parameters.  I would expect
> designers to be interested in subjective behaviour, and therefore want to
> specify the literal values that are subjectively right, not some
> algorithmic approximation.
>
> The over the wire cost of these examples would be higher than sending the
> literal, i.e. a preprocessor would be better.
>
> I would think scripting interfaces would already cope with dynamic, client
> side, manipulation.
>
>
> --
> David Woolley
> Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
> RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
> that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
>



-- 
Pete Boere
Web Developer
Received on Saturday, 21 January 2012 12:14:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:48 GMT