|
|
Posted by mbstevens on 11/27/18 11:24
Neredbojias wrote:
> With neither quill nor qualm, dorayme quothed:
>
>
>>>>If you want a larger class of colours, stick to 6. There is nothing
>>>>then to gain from 3ing colours that happen to be like #XXYYZZ and lots
>>>>to lose, namely a changing of actual colour when 3ing a colour like
>>>>#UVWXYZ by some rather arbitrary "rounding". There is unlikely to be a
>>>>logical way of doing this to preserve the approx colour without
>>>>reference to the colour itself and matching a "close enough" colour
>>>>between two sets of colour (in which one is a subset of the other).
>>>
>>>This would _only_ matter in photo retouching, digital imaging,
>>>and the like. Designing pages with backgrounds and foregrounds
>>>from three hex integers provides more than enough colors. I
>>>find it also makes it easier to tweak the colors -- to find
>>>combinations I like without resorting to a color chart.
>>>--
>>
>>
>>I, too, tend to only use the 3 hex lot. But this
>>may not suit everyone. I have fancied that I
>>can't *always* get what I want in 3 and so use 6
>>now and then. But this may be a simple conceit.
>>Every person needs some to have the pride to go
>>on.
>
>
> Every person needs some for simple contentment.
Hoare's Law:
"Inside every large program is a small program
struggling to get out."
C.A.R. Hoare
(I think it applies to CSS markup, too.
Go baroque and you'll go broke.)
--
mbstevens
http://www.mbstevens.com/cgi/mkatt.pl?name=python/Critique_Generator
(New version 1.2 with macros.)
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|