- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2021 20:05:05 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Tangent: oh geez even *hue* isn't consistent across spaces. Obvious once I think about it, but didn't occur to me at first. > Beyond that, is consistency with RCS the only reason to make the names single letter, or is it an independently good change? I think it's a good change on its own, for a few reasons: 1. The channel names are *right there* in the function name. This is the same reason they were good to use in relative colors, because it's obvious right from our naming conventions what value is being taken from where. Same applies here - if you're adjusting in `lch` space (and the space name is mandatory, so it's definitely right there at the start of the function), then the `h` name has a very obvious source and meaning. 2. Channel names aren't always obvious, and they're often slightly complex English words, or even specialized jargon not used in normal English. (a) In `hwb()`, you can't predict whether the second channel should be called `white` or `whiteness`, for example; in `cmyk()`, it's not clear whether `k` stands for `black` or `key` to someone not already steeped in color jargon (b) In `hsl()`, `saturation` and `lightness` are long. (c) in `lch()`, "chroma" is technical jargon. We avoid all of these by just using the single-letter names we're already using for each channel. 3. Several spaces use single-letter channel names anyway, like the "a" and "b" channels of Lab, and it just *feels weird* to me that some spaces get to have these arbitrary short and easy names, while others have to spell out long names. This is definitely an aesthetic judgement, however. -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6142#issuecomment-812141232 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 1 April 2021 20:05:07 UTC