- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 17:02:03 -0700
- To: "Grant, Melinda" <melinda.grant@hp.com>, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Monday 2007-01-29 16:18 -0600, Grant, Melinda wrote [in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Jan/0101.html ]: > Any reason why the CSS3 Color Module http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/ > <http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/> should reference the ICC Profile > Format Specification, version 3.2. 1995 rather than the latest version, > version 4.2 at http://www.color.org/ICC1v42_2006-05.pdf > <http://www.color.org/ICC1v42_2006-05.pdf> ? This was recorded as http://csswg.inkedblade.net/spec/css3-color#issue-18 . The reference has been updated in the editor's draft at http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-color/#normative . On Tuesday 2007-01-30 23:35 +0100, Chris Lilley wrote [in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Jan/0113.html ]: > CL> In general (to get back to your question) it seems to be the right > CL> thing to update to the current version, it may be ok to go for "this > CL> version or higher" and I would prefer to have more hard facts to go > CL> on. I have a couple of enquiries going and will report back. At this > CL> point I am mainly concerned with when Microsoft ICM 2.0 was updated > CL> and to check what version of ICC profiles is supported in the version > CL> that ships today (XP SP2). > > It seems that my caution was, unfortunately, well justified. OS X and > Linux are on ICC v.4, but Windows XP is by default still on v.2 I'm having trouble if this implies that that wasn't the right thing to do, though. If you are not satisfied with this response, please let us know within two weeks, if possible. -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2008 00:02:44 UTC