- From: Coises <Randy@coises.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 17:51:38 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
[Thu, 30 May 2002 10:42:40 -0400 (EDT)] Jon Ferraiolo: >So, it might be good to look at strategies that are most likely bring >discussion to a close as quickly as possible, such as "just accept what SVG >1.0 did" or "deprecate all color keywords everywhere". Defining new color >keywords seems likely to produce the longest possible discussion. For whatever they're worth, here are the (possibly quite naïve) comments of someone not particularly versed in perceptual theory regarding the discussion of the <http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-css3-color-20020418 working draft and color names and designations: This seems to me to be "much ado about nothing" --- for the most part: 1. If the X11 colors are already in common use, it's going to make little difference whether they're formally included, omitted or deprecated: practical user agents are still going to have to support them. The major difference would be whether validators flag them or not --- I'd say it's better to let the validators distinguish "correct" color names from errors than to lead authors to ignore all validator messages about color names. Deprecation, or even official "non-standardization," doesn't get people to stop using something that works, or to re-write existing pages that work. What *does* get people to change is the invention of easier and/or more effective ways to accomplish what they want to do. Folks are using styles to define font properties, because they're more comprehensive and easier to manage than a tag-soup of repetitive <FONT> elements. Folks are still using tables for layout, though, because they *work* (no matter how much they're frowned upon) --- while getting a complex CSS-based layout to display appropriately with different browsers, window sizes and users' font settings is an exercise in hair-pulling. 2. I fail to see the great advantage of color names. Regardless of what system is used for designating colors, I'm not going to know what the page I'm designing looks like until I look at it! RGB may not be entirely natural, but it's not exactly difficult to grasp, either. It never seems to take me that long to "tweak" a #rrggbb value to get the color I want --- and, of course, authoring tools will provide "color pickers" no matter what system is used. Also, color names can't be "tweaked"; so unless a naming scheme that includes (or generates) 2^24 color names is invented, it will always be necessary to abandon the names and use a numeric system to specify a desired color precisely anyway. 3. What *does* matter is that whatever method is used produces "the same" colors (meaning, I suppose, perceptually equivalent results, within the tolerance of the devices and environments in question) on all devices. The limitations of my knowledge don't allow me to guess whether any system is any more or less able to accomplish this than any other, or if that problem lies totally outside the scope of behaviors CSS can hope to define. If CSS has any bearing on this, though, then I'd say adopting a specification that maximizes cross-platform and cross-environment fidelity to the colors originally chosen by the designer is infinitely more important than how "friendly" the system of specification appears at first glance. There are a few specifics about this working draft that bother me: 4. Why is there a definition of the "color" property, but not of "background-color" or "border-top-color" and so on? I think because this specification isn't defining the color property, but the "<color>" set of values. The "color" property itself surely belongs with the definition of font properties (or possibly box properties). 5. What's with "attr(X,color)"? The concept seems useful --- an extension of the way "attr" is used in the "content" property --- but is this the place to define it? Shouldn't this be a matter of general syntax: allowing some variant of "attr(X)" in any property to derive the specified value of the property from the corresponding attribute? It strikes me like a bad idea to incorporate this concept here, where some detail might turn out to interfere with a better way of implementing the idea across all properties. I also don't quite get why the ",color" is needed. Perhaps that's meant to prevent conflicts with other modules --- but again, it seems to me a concept like this that has "cross-module" applicability should be defined in some general module that can consider the effect on all properties, not in a specific module where the results might interfere with later work. 6. The "color-profile" and "rendering-intent" and "@color-profile" material is all terribly obscure to a novice such as myself. From a direct reading of this specification, I have no idea what these things are all about. Particularly odious is that the effective *default* value of color-profile, sRGB, is apparently defined in a specification that is not available on the free web, and can only be accessed by paying a fee to a third party! Is this really acceptable for a W3C standard? 7. The system colors seem to me to be unnecessarily confusing. If I want to make, say, a button "look like" buttons normally look on users' systems, why not have a single style rule, such as: button {system-style: button} that (re-)sets all colors, borders, fonts, sizes, etc. to the current system standard appearance? Details could still be overridden by later or higher-specificity style rules. The same concept could be used to return other properties to the values that would be derived from the user style sheet and the user agent default style sheet alone, or to apply them to other elements; e.g.: a[href] {system-style: a[href]} could be expected typically to restore the (user+system) defaults for link colors and underlining (though other properties could be affected); this: .inputexample {system-style: input[type=text]} would make an element of class "inputexample" mimic the standard appearance of a text input field. It just seems to me very unlikely that anyone would want to apply individual system colors, apart from the other colors and style elements that apply to the same controls. How many colors, border widths, etc. would it take to "mimic" a standard button? Why not simply leave it to the user agent to restore the default appearance, if that's what's wanted? -- Randall Joseph Fellmy aka Randy@Coises.com
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 20:51:48 UTC