- From: Bramus via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 11:12:12 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> things are already closed […] I think this was mistakingly done so. The end goal is to have something like `schemed-value()`, with `light-dark()` being an intermediary step towards the final solution. This is also reflected [in the meeting minutes](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7561#issuecomment-1671786293): go for `light-dark()` now, and extend to more color schemes and other types of values in the future. _(I’m hereby reopening the issue)_ > As a simple example, consider if it were implemented this way instead: > > […] The syntax you propose rhymes with was suggested in the original post. I like the suggestion to have the function accept an arbitrary number of scheme-value pairs. Much handier than needing to nest one `schemed-value()` into the other. _Side note: I’ve added [an extra section to my post](https://www.bram.us/2023/10/09/the-future-of-css-easy-light-dark-mode-color-switching-with-light-dark/#schemed-value) to explicitly mention that `light-dark()` is not the end goal but `schemed-color()`/`schemed-value()` is. This will hopefully remove some of the confusion._ -- GitHub Notification of comment by bramus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7561#issuecomment-1755088882 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 10 October 2023 11:12:14 UTC