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: Sebastian Zartner <sebastianzartner@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 00:03:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CAERejNYpVizHA_1DyvUWgqZisuhuc-O6=j=8aqkqwbBmsz1U9A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Sam L'ecuyer" <sam@cateches.is>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, Lea Verou <lea@w3.org>, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, Šime Vidas <sime.vidas@gmail.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
I want to add one example:

color(rgb(255, 69, 0), .5);

Instead of having different functions for color effects like changing the
brightness like Lea said earlier, the color() function could also do this:

color(#ff4500, saturation - 20%);
color(orangered, luminance 50%);

Not sure if this approach is better than having different functions, though.

Sebastian


On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Sam L'ecuyer <sam@cateches.is> wrote:

>
> > 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.
>
> As far as I know, opacity doesn't get applied to individual color channels.
> As long as all of these resolve to the same thing, I'm for it.
>
> color(#ff4500, alpha 50%);
> color(orangered, alpha 50%);
> color(255, 69, 0, .50);
> color(255, 69, 0,alpha * .5);
>
> -s
>
>
Received on Thursday, 9 May 2013 22:04:08 UTC

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