> On Feb 11, 2016, at 4:15 am, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: > >> >> On Feb 11, 2016, at 11:59, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On Feb 11, 2016, at 11:40 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote: >>>>>> 2. We will add a new function for describing colors that accepts a >>>>>> color-profile name and a variable number of arguments. e.g. >>>>>> color("bt2020", 0.7, 0.3, 0.1). The name can be linked to a >>>>>> @color-profile, but we will also have some predefined keywords for >>>>>> the most common profiles. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, exactly. I was thinking of icc rather than color, which is >>>>> shorter and more descriptive (these are icc profiles). >>>> >>>> That sounds fine by me. >>> >>> Yeah, I like icc() fine. >> >> I dislike this name. icc is short for "International Color Consortium”, and that doesn’t make sense as a function name to me. >> >> Is CSS going to spec the acceptable list of ICC profile names, or is this left undefined? > > I tend to prefer color() over icc() as well. As for where the profile names come from, should at least hardcode sRGB, and could hardcode a few more, but in general I expect that we would also have an @rule to declare color spaces. > > @colors "adobe-rgb" { > profile: url("https://www.example.com/adobe.icc <https://www.example.com/adobe.icc>"); > } I think we’re prefer to avoid referencing external resources for colors. What do you show before the resource is available? Transparent? SimonReceived on Friday, 12 February 2016 02:16:46 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:56 UTC