W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2011

Re: [css] Proposal: making Shorthand Hex Colors even shorter (16 grayscale shades)

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:47:15 -0700
Message-Id: <C7587EE6-20FD-41F7-9485-A8516FA7AD7B@gmail.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, Markus Bruch <macinfo@arcor.de>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
To: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
On Aug 2, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com> wrote:

> On 3/08/2011 9:51 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Alan Gresley<alan@css-class.com>  wrote:
>>> I totally agree with Tab here regarding a 2-hexadigit variant. The expansion
>>> rule is different and could be confusing to authors if any method was
>>> spec'd. I'm also against having a 4-hexadigit as a shortcut for 8-hexadigit
>>> (last two digits for alpha).
>> Bwuh?  Are you against an 8-digit hex variant as well, or just against
>> the 4-digit variant specifically?  If the latter, why?  4-digit hex is
>> expanded to 8-digit hex in exactly the same way that 3-digit expands
>> to 6-digit.
>> ~TJ
> I support an 8-digit hex with an extra two hex places for alpha (#RRGGBBAA). I believe having a shortcut for this is extra confusing an unnecessary.

I disagree. I think it would be confusing and inconsistent to have a short form of #RRGGBB (#RGB) to go with the long form, and NOT have a short form of #RRGGBBAA (#RGBA) to go with the long form. 

I don't feel there is much need for gray(n) or #H gray. Gray(n%) would be kind of convenient and easy to learn as an alternative to hsl(), as Tab mentioned. GrayA(n%,a) wouldn't be terrible, but it feels to me like it looses a bit of the simplicity that made me like the Gray(n%) idea. 
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2011 04:47:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:03 UTC