Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-color-5] Wide review (#7297)

> The current WCAG3 draft does specify "using an APCA compliant tool." I was told at the time that the editors wanted the complicated technical information as a separate white paper.

I find that insufficient. I would **strongly prefer** the algorithm to be normative, and whatever tool happens to implement it is then up to the individual. Linking off to another paper evades the W3C Patent Policy and discourages independent implementation.

> it's possible for a non-polarity-sensitive iteration, giving up accuracy by splitting the difference.

Its possible, but I don't see any merit in having a less accurate version.

> Similarly it's possible to improve accuracy by adding in a third, and possibly fourth, and fifth, color inputs (for the larger background, RMS page luminance, and ambient, respectively). 

Right and here we are getting into color appearance modeling rather than colorimetry (as you know, but explaining for others following this thread). That unfortunately breaks the entire concept of CSS, because now everything depends on the entire page design.

Adding proximal field might be worth examining, but seems difficult and error prone. Adding room illuminance, especially in an automated way with an ambient light sensor, seems like a privacy concern.

> Regardless, I don't think having two functions is needed—all that is needed is that the functions are aware of what property is calling them. 

```css
--myvar = color-contrast(--color1 vs --color2, --color3);
```

we don't know where `var(--myvar)` is going to be assigned.

Related:

- https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5292

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7297#issuecomment-1146860995 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Sunday, 5 June 2022 18:24:15 UTC