- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 18:47:28 +0200
- To: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
On Friday, September 10, 2010, 3:45:30 PM, Christoph wrote:
CP> The 120° table in solitary section 4.2.4.1 is labeled “green”,
CP> but CSS calls hsl(120, 100%, 50%), which is equal to rgb(0%, 100%,
CP> 0%), ‘lime’ instead. There should probably be a note to that
CP> effect, e.g. like for ‘orange’. Also, the basic (CSS1/2 / HTML /
CP> VGA) alias for “Cyan” at 180° is ‘aqua’ rgb(0%, 100%, 100%) and
CP> for “Magenta” it is ‘fuchsia’ rgb(100%, 0%, 100%), assuming 100% saturation and 50% lightness.
(I'm replying in three parts as you raise three separate issues)
The names heading each of the tables in the HSL section are not intended to correspond to specific named colours, but to be general descriptions of which segment of a colour wheel they are illustrating. This is because each table entry shows a number of colours (a 9 by 5 grid), at different saturation and lightness values.
So for example the 120° table contains various greens; one of them does indeed correspond to 'lime' but the others do not.
Maybe it would be clearer to label the tables in the plural - reds instead of red, etc.
Incidentally, and following your note about lime vs green, in example IX
* { color: hsl(120, 100%, 50%) } /* green */
should of course be
* { color: hsl(120, 100%, 50%) } /* lime */
Would it be acceptable to you if the tables of colour slices are labelled in the plural, to make it clear that the table headings are not intended to be color keywords?
--
Chris Lilley Technical Director, Interaction Domain
W3C Graphics Activity Lead, Fonts Activity Lead
Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Member, CSS, WebFonts, SVG Working Groups
Received on Thursday, 7 October 2010 16:47:41 UTC