W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2010

[whatwg] Need document.available_fonts() call

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 17:30:29 -0400
Message-ID: <4BE9CC75.9040408@mit.edu>
On 5/11/10 4:59 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Perry Smith<pedzsan at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Well, my take is just the opposite.  Portability should dictate only if the
>> user wants portability.  I don't believe we confine what colors can be
>> picked based upon what is portable.
> Actually...  some machines can display colors with rgb values outside
> of the [0,255] range.  But CSS clamps you to that range because it's
> portable.

CSS clamps to [0,255]?  Since when? 
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/#rgb-color says:

   Values outside the device gamut should be clipped or mapped into
   the gamut when the gamut is known: the red, green, and blue values
   must be changed to fall within the range supported by the device.
   User agents may perform higher quality mapping of colors from one
   gamut to another. This specification does not define precise
   clipping behavior.
   Other devices, such as printers, have different gamuts than sRGB;
   some colors outside the 0..255 sRGB range will be representable
   (inside the device gamut), while other colors inside the 0..255
   sRGB range will be outside the device gamut and will thus be mapped.

There is then an example that says that on an sRGB device rgb(300,0,0) 
will be the same as rgb(255,0,0)... but on a non-sRGB device they may 
well not be.

Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2010 14:30:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:23 UTC