- From: Isaac Muse via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2023 15:51:14 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> I am sorry, but I am not really following. @romainmenke I think what is being suggested is just to map the points more 3 dimensionally instead of just mapping by reducing chroma in one dimension. It's mapping the geometry of a wider gamut surface down to a smaller gamut surface. This sacrifices preserving lightness, chroma, and hue to gain something the suggester thinks would be more intuitive. What is better can be subjective based on what your intent is. CSS has chosen to preserve as much of the original color intent as possible by only reducing chroma (though some minor hue and lightness are sacrificed with the clipping via MINDE). It is like what is expressed in this [Oklab gamut mapping article](https://bottosson.github.io/posts/gamutclipping/#choosing-which-line-to-project-along). Do you just project along the chroma dimension? Or do you project in the lightness dimension as well, and if so, then by what degree do you project in the lightness dimension, or how much original lightness are you willing to sacrifice to get what you think is a "better" color? The suggestion being made is to do this more in 3 dimensions, most likely sacrificing more hue and lightness than CSS currently does. > The focus of this issue is that browsers shipped color notations that can express wide gamut colors without implementing gamut mapping. > > New issues for your specific questions would be easier to resolve without causing noise in this issue :) I agree, this probably deserves a separate topic if a different algorithm wants to be discussed. -- GitHub Notification of comment by facelessuser Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/9449#issuecomment-1836342357 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 1 December 2023 15:51:16 UTC