W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2010

Re: [css3-color] #rrggbbaa annotation

From: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 17:25:38 +0200
Message-ID: <6E64F1D053264F6D9254D0D7403D79D6@Fremy1>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Alberto Lepe" <dev@alepe.com>
Cc: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
Agree here. W3C is slow enough as is. We don't need to make
it even slower for a so small change. We could live whithout
a perfect color module for Colors v3. 

I would prefer delaying until Colors v4.

From: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 5:14 PM
To: "Alberto Lepe" <dev@alepe.com>
Cc: "www-style list" <www-style@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [css3-color] #rrggbbaa annotation

> Guys, there's no need to argue.  We know that #rgba will be easy to
> spec and implement, as it's a trivial parsing change.  We also know
> that some authors (me included) have grown to greatly prefer the hex
> notation, and find it the most intuitive.
> The only thing we don't know is if it's worth pulling Colors 3 out of
> Last Call to add a new feature, and letting it run through LC again
> afterwards.  I would personally rather let it bake as-is so we can put
> it to rest, and slab #rgba into Colors 4.  That won't delay its
> implementation any; it's mostly a political/process thing.
> ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 15:26:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:44 UTC