Re: SVG Color Keywords Applicability

On Tuesday 2008-05-13 15:15 +1000, Peter Moulder wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 05:04:09PM -0700, L. David Baron wrote:
> > This has been recorded as
> > and has been
> > addressed in the editor's draft at
> > by adding the
> > sentence:
> >   # This specification extends their definition beyond SVG.
> Can sections 4.1 and 4.3 be merged, then?  Suggested title ‘Color
> keywords’.  We could still start by listing the 16 HTML colours (or 17
> CSS 2.1 colours, = HTML + orange) given that they include the most basic
> colours.
> Having a single section makes it clearer that there's no distinction in
> their treatment as far as css3-color is concerned.

Reorganizing the specification at this level of maturity has a bit
of cost (breaking links people have, requiring reorganization of the
test suite, etc.).  It also makes it a lot harder to write the
profiles section I reference below.  Do you really think that's
worth it?

(I'd have agreed if you made this comment during last call.)

> If a motivation for having separate lists is to give information on
> backwards compatibility, then I'd have thought it more valuable to
> identify the colour specifications supported by CSS 2.1
> (
> than those supported by HTML attributes. does this already, I


L. David Baron                       
Mozilla Corporation             

Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2008 22:15:18 UTC