- From: Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:29:32 -0400
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- Cc: W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
As previously noted I'd remove section 3.1.1. I think it's an unhealthy section. There are also two more references in the spec to CRTs, which I think needs to be updated for LCDs by at least adding a reference to them. Paragraph starting with "Values outside the device gamut should be slipped...when the gamut is known." I'd remove the whole. The phrase "For a typical CRT monitor, whose device gamut is the same as sRGB..." demonstrates a fundamental problem that we have with the LCD world of today in that there is no typical LCD display and their gamut can be decidedly smaller than that of sRGB. Best regards, Chris Murphy On Jul 21, 2008, at 6:46 PM, Bert Bos wrote: > > Bert Bos wrote: > >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-css3-color-20080721/ > >> There are no other changes to the specification > > Sorry, I need to qualify that: > > There are no changes to the syntax, no new features and no other > features removed, but there are actually *many* changes to the text. > We used the opportunity to update the five-year-old text to the > latest writing style. Nearly all changes are clarifications, updated > references and other editorial changes. > > But there are also previously vague definitions that were made > precise, in particular about handling opacity (compositing semi- > transparent elements). That means that there may exist > implementations, at least in theory, that handle opacity differently > from the new, stricter definitions. > > If so, please tell us about it. > > > > Bert > -- > Bert Bos ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/ > http://www.w3.org/people/bos W3C/ERCIM > bert@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93 > +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France >
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2008 02:32:11 UTC