- From: Chris Lilley via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 19:35:28 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> Is this correct? No, but it does require a very close reading of the entire RCS section, including a snippet of text buried between two large examples, to see this. In contrast to `color-mix()`, which [says explicitly](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color-5/#color-mix-result) right at the start of 3.2 > As described in [CSS Color 4 § 12. Color Interpolation](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color-4/#interpolation), both colors are converted to the specified interpolation [<color-space>](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color-5/#typedef-color-space), taking into account any [analogous components](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color-4/#analogous-components). RCS mentions this only in passing, [near the end of section 4](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color-5/#relative-colors) > Missing components are handled the same way as with [CSS Color 4 § 12.2 Interpolating with Missing Components](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color-4/#interpolation-missing): the origin colorspace and the relative function colorspace are checked for [analogous components](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color-4/#analogous-components) which are then carried forward as missing. This needs to be _much more visible_, and mentioned up at the front of the section. In conclusion the spec already says what to do, but it is easy to not notice that it does so. -- GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10151#issuecomment-2052414693 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 12 April 2024 19:35:30 UTC