- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 14:26:22 +0100
- To: (wrong string) Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- CC: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, 3:16:30 AM, Tantek wrote: TÇ> On 2/18/03 2:45 PM, "fantasai" <fantasai@escape.com> wrote: TÇ> Pardon the interruption, but it seems like fantasai and Chris Lilley are TÇ> talking about two different things. I think you are right. TÇ> I *thought* Chris was talking about the _CSS2_system_colors_, for TÇ> which there is no functionally equivalent alternative. They're far TÇ> from perfect, but they still have some utility, have been TÇ> interoperably implemented by two or more user agents, and have TÇ> been referenced/used by the SVG specifications. This is exactly what I was talking about and what I thought fantasai was talking about. I agree about all the reasons, the drawbacks, and the overal decision that they are still useful as well. I should *also* point out that in SVG there is the notion of a paint server, which can at the simplest case be a solid color but in the (slightly more) complex cases can be a gradient, a repeated pattern, and so on. Thus, in SVG, these might not resolve to a simple solid color. TÇ> It's clear that fantasai is talking about the TÇ> _CSS3_hyperlink_colors_, which *do* have a functionally equivalent TÇ> alternative as fantasai pointed out (don't override the user's TÇ> link colors). Ah, okay. TÇ> They have not been implemented (AFAIK), and have not TÇ> been referenced/used by any other specifications. TÇ> I am still *for* dropping the CSS3 hyperlink colors. TÇ> It appears that fantasai is also for dropping them. TÇ> Does anyone else have an opinion either way? Let me reconsider that part for a day or two and get back to you. TÇ> You've got (just under) 10 days to speak up. If no one objects I TÇ> am leaning towards dropping the CSS3 hyperlink colors. -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2003 08:26:31 UTC