- From: Moschini, Chris <cmoschini@xchange.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 17:00:31 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-style@w3.org
- Message-ID: <F1A28355A077D411BD4200B0D049930C0387950F@bosmail2.xchange.com>
I'm sorry for entering this discussion so late. Firstly, I agree with the general sentiment that it is unfortunate such an unclear set of color definitions become prevalent in common use. So, should they be standardized so that browsers are consistent, or not to penalize their use? Clearly, penalization is ineffective. So standardization is the only available option... . But is there perhaps a way in which these colors could be standardized that encourages best use? These colors provide quite the area of grey. One can easily say that seeing color: red; is more meaningful than color: #f00; - and yet, one can also easily say that seeing color: papayawhip; is less meaningful than color: #ffefd5, rgb( 255, 239, 213 ), or verylightyellow. So where is the line drawn? I think if we're to assume we must make a recommendation in this area of grey (the clear 16 colors have been covered) then we must write the recommendation appropriately. We could for example recommend several color naming patterns. The conjuncts verylightyellow and paleyellow could be just as valid as papayawhip, and yet all refer to the same color. Yes, such a duality presents boggling opportunity for inconsistency, but taking this area of grey guarantees you venture into cultural and professional boundaries (if I sell tiles I may identify with colors like deepskyblue, while as a painter I may identify with lightcyanblue). The only way to equitably define this area is to be as open as possible without becoming ridiculous. -Chris Moschini - UI Development, Xchange
Received on Friday, 24 May 2002 05:01:07 UTC