- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 17:20:32 -0700
- To: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de> wrote: > Regarding the current state of the Editor’s Draft: > >> The final argument, the <alpha-value>, specifies the alpha of the color. >> >> The final argument specifies the alpha channel of the color. >> It’s interpreted identically to the fourth argument of the rgb() function > > The textual definitions of ‘rgb()’/‘rgba()’ and ‘hsl()’/‘hsla()’, as cited above, read as if the transparency value wasn’t limited to the …a variants any more, as is the case in ‘hwb()’, but the formal definitions don’t reflect that yet (or any more perhaps): > > rgb() = rgb( <component>, <component>, <component> [, <alpha-value>]? ) > hsl() = hsl( <hue>, <percentage>, <percentage> [, <alpha-value>]? ) > > It would be a useful change, nevertheless. Thanks for the catch - it previously modified rgb()/hsl() to have optional alpha, but the WG decided to revert that change last year. I've changed the references to rgba(). > The “<color> type” section (3) should be split into two or three sections, not sub-sections, for numeral notation variants (3.1–2), named colors (3.3) and possibly the type itself (3.0 and 3.4). The current organization was a relic of the previous Colors 3 draft. Your suggested organization makes sense, so I've adopted it. Thanks! ~TJ
Received on Saturday, 22 March 2014 00:21:19 UTC