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

Re: [css4-color] unclamped values for RGB

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:13:14 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGN7qDCE1_X2oWor8O0zqm2Oy6ixqD8WPYeh5=Van1D37xNT1g@mail.gmail.com>
To: liam@w3.org
Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 20:53 -0700, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> > I have been talking to some of the color experts at Adobe and it turns
> out
> > that there are some use cases for unclamped colors that are used in some
> > advanced features in our products.
> > It still seems like too advanced of a feature that will make basic color
> > managment hard to implement.
>
> If it's to do with cmky/process ink coverage (a guess) then I don't
> think it should be considered too advanced. I.e. don't preclude adding
> it later.


Hi Liam,

Yes, it was related to that.
Basically, if you have no color management but you still want to reach
colors that outside of the sRGB gamut (ie AdobeRGB if you want to print),
it is reasonable to allow unclamped values. (HDR is another use case but
way to advanced)
Our people did agree that supporting ICC profiles would be a much better
workflow. Not only will this be much easier to use for the designer, it
will also allow browsers to render color consistently.

I'm still leaning towards saying that colors should be clamped but not
opposed if that doesn't change.

I would like to know if people are interested in ICC profile support so if
a designer does want to real color management, he could convey that to the
browser. The SVG attributes seem to suffice for that workflow.

What do you think? How would we go about finding this out?

Rik
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2012 04:13:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:56 GMT