W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2013

Re: [css-color] Have you considered standardizing a rgba(#RRGGBB, <alpha-value>) notation?

From: Lea Verou <lea@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 00:05:57 +0300
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmail.com>, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, Šime Vidas <sime.vidas@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <780F887B-B1DA-4774-980F-65BAB1DC1C68@w3.org>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
That confused me too at first. red here was a sample color reference (named color). It could be deeppink instead. Only by coincidence it matches a color channel.

Lea Verou
W3C developer relations
http://w3.org/people/all#leahttp://lea.verou.me ✿ @leaverou






On May 10, 2013, at 00:00, Brad Kemper wrote:

> On May 9, 2013, at 1:33 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> color(red, alpha * 75%) vs color(red, alpha 50%)
>> 
>> That one's intriguing, and pretty readable I think.  
> 
> The first one seems to mean that the red channel is set to 3/4 of the alpha (opacity) channel. I don't know what the second one is supposed to mean. 
> 
> If you want to set channels independently, I think it should be something like this: 
> 
> r(255); a(0.5);
> or
> rgba(255, *, *, 0.5)
> or
> r(#ff); a(#7f);
> or
> rgba(#ff, *, *, #7f)
> 
> Or various combinations of the above. 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 9 May 2013 21:06:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:29 UTC