- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 19:13:53 +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 *keyword* ‘transparent’ is currently found in section 4.2 on CP> “numerical color values”. Yes. CP> I assume that is because of its computed CP> value rgba(0,0,0,0), Yes. Although, the explanation there should really say that the keyword 'transparent' is shorthand for transparent black, rgba(0,0,0,0) as both a colour and an opacity are specified here. This distincion is important when the value transparent is animated to change the opacity, or when the value is interpolated as one stop in a gradient, for example. CP> but it makes absolutely no sense for authors CP> (at least). Please, the first thing you should do for level 4 is CP> restructuring this module. I have made more detailed suggestions before. Yes, you have. The editors have expressed a reluctance to change section numbering in CSS3 color, to avoid breaking cross references to an old and mostly stable specification. As you point out, CSS4 color will not have that constraint and can have a structure that is more logical and intuitive. So, while taking your criticism to heart, I propose to make no change to the structure for CSS3 color and instead to ensure that CSS4 color has a more logical structure. (Currently there is no CSS4 color draft, but it will be developed on the W3C public CVS, dev.w3.org and so you will be able to see and comment on this as soon as it exists and before its first publication on the W3 technical Reports page). Please let us know if this resolution of your comment is acceptable. -- 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 17:14:23 UTC