- From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 00:29:09 +0000
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Bjoern Hoehrmann: >How values are serialized would only be important if people post-process the serialized values Incorrect. Testability is just one of many things that make it important to be crisp, if the serialization section remains normative in the WD. >Compatibility issues aside "Compatibility issues aside" pretty much excludes the entire web from "now" back to the dawn of the internet. That's a pretty big assumption. > you'd turn #rrggbb and rgb(...) into rgba(...) as the rgba notation Why? I wouldn't. For fully opaque colors, it's unnecessarily verbose and unusual to force rgba when rgb() or #rrggbb was provided by the author. #fffefd: 7 characters rgba(255, 254, 253, 1): 22 characters ~3x the size to express the same meaning > rgba notation is a strict su- per set of the former two in terms of what it can represent It's not a strict superset of hsl() or hsla(). So should hsl/hsla stay as is or be converted to rgba to have a consistent canonical form for colors? Should keywords such as "blue" be converted as well? That's an unfortunate loss of expressiveness. Especially if we try to introduce something like color-adjust-opacity(blue, 0.5) someday. > So I'm not sure this is a matter of being verbose and precise versus being terse. Transmit efficiency is another concern (as mentioned briefly above). An omitted parameter costs nothing to transmit, while a required-on-output parameter does have a cost. Required parameters on output also bloat pages such that sometimes they don't round-trip. For example, if your property parser supports N characters and a web page uses N characters but omits the first parameter of a linear-gradient background-image then the value won't round-trip once the required-on-output parameter is added. Then there's the issue of horizontal-then-vertical vs. vertical-then-horizontal with background-position serialization vs. <bg-position> within radial-gradient. There's more, but I'd rather not rehash the entire discussion of concerns with the serialization proposed for gradients in the images spec. -Brian
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2011 00:29:54 UTC