- From: Dylan Schiemann <dylan@sitepen.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 17:46:05 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-svg@w3.org
- CC: www-style@w3.org
Chris Lilley wrote: > Well there are objections to the bad design of HSL as well, of course. > I proposed a greatly superior solution, CNS, in 1996 [1] which was > perceptually even - changing lightness would change lightness > regardless of hue; changing hue would not alter lightness, the color > steps were evenly perceptually spaced, and scores very well in > scientifically conducted usability studies (much better than HSL for > example). None of these things is true of X11 or of HSL. > > However, although most posters to www-style were in favour of it, it > never got to consensus, largely due to a poorly-informed critique by > David Perrell[2] who thought it was a subset of HSB (later retracted > [3] but mud sticks), the lack of online resources (it was fully > described, but in a print journal), and a general programmer aversion > to color theory, and general indifference to color reproducibility in > CSS implementors. It was just too high a bar, too early. Eventually I > stopped suggesting it. Instead we went for tying the RGB colors to a > real international standard for what they meant, rather than "device > RGB" and leaving it to authoring tools to provide color pickers, > lists, or whatever they wanted as a user interface. CNS is very cool... I had never read about it before, and would love to read the original journal article. My guess is that it wasn't received more favorably because the math wasn't obvious from a thirty-second glance. In my opinion, CSS color should allow arbitrary color schemes through some sort of custom color mechanism. CSS2 has the following: color: keyword; (inherit, transparent, systemColors, etc.) color: namedColor; color: #ff0; color: #ffff00; color: rgb(255,255,0); color: rgb(100%,100%,0%); CSS3 proposes additing: color: x11NamedColor; color: attr(X,color); color: rgba(255,255,0,1); color: hsl(%,%,%); color: hsla(%,%,%,#); If we are adding color-profiles, why not consider adding color-name-profiles, such as: color: profile(profileName,colorValues,profileURI) with the profileURL optional, containing a translation table to sRGB, or a set of functions (one for each of several commonly used programming languages). Thus, all could be expressed as: color: profile(keyword,inherit); color: profile(html4,blue,url()); color: profile(rgbHex,#ff0); color: profile(rgbHex,#ffff00); color: profile(rgb,255,255,0); color: profile(rgb,100%,100%,0%); color: profile(x11,orange,url()); color: profile(rgba,100%,100%,0%,1,url()); color: profile(hsl,100%,100%,0%,1,url()); color: profile(hsla,100%,100%,0%,1,url()); color: profile(cns,orange,very dark,vivid,url()); color: profile(crayola,electric lime,url()); color: profile(com.dylanschiemann.www.customColorNames,Lincoln Log,url()); Some of these are of course ridiculously longer than using the shorter syntax. Browsers could be required to be able to convert colors using a lookup table for named colors, or read the method for that browsers language of choice to do rgb conversions. I would think this should be optional, but would be very useful for using a standard css syntax for authoring programs. For example, a Dreamweaver like program could offer custom color palettes from a company such as Crayola, create a color picker which would store the colors in this new css syntax, and then offer an rgb export conversion if most browsers did not support this optional color name profile. -Dylan > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/1996Feb/0006.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/1996Feb/0020.html > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/1996Feb/0016.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/1996Feb/0019.html > [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/1996Feb/0022.html > [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/1996Apr/0029.html > [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/1996Jul/0166.html > > -- Dylan Schiemann SitePen, Inc. http://www.sitepen.com/ 310.315.7301
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 07:44:15 UTC