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

Re: [css-color] Editorial: have an exhaustive definition of the <color> type

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 16:36:48 +0200
Message-ID: <55176158.20130925163648@w3.org>
To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>
CC: www-style@w3.org
Hello Simon,

Wednesday, September 25, 2013, 4:17:14 PM, you wrote:

> Hi,

> The current ED has a section named "RGB Colors: the <color> type", and
> following sections that define other color values like hsl(). This split
> seems to imply that only RGB colors are <color>, the other values would
> be something else.

I agree that is misleading. Its not actually incorrect, since HSL is a
reformulation of RGB. But I agree that the spec should distinguish
between syntactic forms and semantic components. In particular, hsl
values are a valid <color> type.

Also, as we will be adding other ways of specifying colours, it needs
to be clear which are <color> and which are something else.
Particularly as some of them include <color> as one part (for a
fallback, for example).

> It would be preferable to have a section that defines <color> as an 
> explicit grammar, and have the various values (RGB, HSL, etc.) be 
> sub-sections.


Agreed.

-- 
Best regards,
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2013 14:36:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:34 UTC