Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Relative Color Syntax (RCS) (Issue #894)

> > Is there an explainer for this that’s not a blog post?
> 
> @LeaVerou Was there an explainer that you all were working from when the spec was first written? This is not the first time that someone has wanted something more official. I could write one now, but that would feel a little post-hoc and I feel like I am far from the most knowledgable person on the subject.

No, but it should be pretty easy to put one together with the info from [the original proposal](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3187) (which includes motivation, use cases, etc) and [the updated proposal](https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3187#issuecomment-499126198) which converged on the sytnax that is currently in the spec.

I believe the differences between the current syntax and the (updated) proposal are:
- Using a gamut-restricted color function does not clip or gamut map anymore
- RCS for `color()` is now much more [fleshed out](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-color-5/#relative-color-function) than it was there.
- The return types for each keyword are now more fleshed out, defaulting to `<number>` when that is allowed for the corresponding component.

@svgeesus, am I forgetting any?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/894#issuecomment-1710413672
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/894/1710413672@github.com>