- From: Alex Danilo <adanilo@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:44:54 +1100
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: Erik Dahlstrom <ed@opera.com>, public-svg-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAGdNekRD7Wc1ohWHGZYZEQ3BiR3PHCVY8Jxsj-RxU=8TmXppnA@mail.gmail.com>
+1 to that. There seems to be some disconnect between what colour management is about recently. For example the recent thread (on webkit-dev perhaps?) about filters generating colour that's 'illegal' - i.e. the colour channels greater than the alpha in pre-multiplied form is wrong. It's just a fluorescent colour. We really should ensure we do colour science properly. Alex On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote: > On Thursday, February 16, 2012, 10:14:36 AM, Erik wrote: > > ED> Missed one thing: > > ED> * color-interpolation-filters > ED> > ED> > http://www.w3.org/mid/CAGN7qDDh_yJX_EzWNtuvW3N_eywgvB3MioMn6FoP_p8kHTwh-A@mail.gmail.com > > > Are we discussing: > > a) how to specify the longhand, element-based equivalent to each of the > css shorthand properties (which will include the value of the > color-interpolation-filters property, > > or > > b) whether to remove color-interpolation-filters and color-interpolation, > thus breaking backwards compatibility and destroying improvements in color > management in SVG2, because of flawed understanding of basic concepts like > gamma, chromaticity, and so forth? > > If a) then I am all in favour of providing the longhand equivalents and > would like to see tests that put the longhand and shorthand side by side so > we can check that implementors are doing the right thing. > > If b) and we are seriously considering legislating the dumb approach to > RGB, then I have strong objections to such a wrong-headed approach. > > I can provide links to further reading if people need to brush up on basic > concepts. > > > -- > Chris Lilley Technical Director, Interaction Domain > W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead > Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG > Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups > > >
Received on Friday, 17 February 2012 14:45:38 UTC