- From: Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:08:07 +1100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Mark Straver <mark@wolfbeast.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 6:22 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> > Are you worried about the computed value of the 'transparent' keyword in >>>>> > the >>>>> > gradient? If so, that one doesn't resolve to an rgba color. >>>>> >>>>> Sure it does. (Or it should be doing so, for consistency - colors >>>>> should be computed in computed values.) >>>> >>>> It does not. I tried Edge, Safari 9, latest Chrome and Firefox. >>> >>> Then that's a bug, either in the specs or the implementations. There >>> is absolutely no reason a color should serialize differently based on >>> whether it's bare or wrapped in a gradient function. >> >> Given all impls current agree with the same behavior here, I guess we >> can probably make 'transparent' a keyword value in gradient function >> to simulate premultiplied effect, and revert the general cases to >> non-premultiplied... > > If and only if there's not a significant number of gradients out there > that currently write out transparent with rgba() syntax, or that use > near-transparent colors that'll significant change behavior here. Yeah, sure. This needs to be proven first before any spec change on this. > And we (Blink) must store the input string somewhere so we can output > it back literally, because I *know* that we parse that into an > #AARRGGBB 4-byte int and operate on it like that. So it doesn't > matter whether you type "transparent" or "rgba(0,0,0,0)", you get > 0x00000000 either way. It seems Gecko does so as well. But we already have an additional bit for interpolation hint, so I guess we are not very concerned about adding another bit for transparent keyword if the spec changes that way. - Xidorn
Received on Tuesday, 26 January 2016 00:09:15 UTC