Subject:
|
Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 22 Jan 2004 23:48:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1847 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> The name should be the characters after the !COLOR keyword and before the next
> keyword. The only contraint I can think of is that is not be one of the other
> keywords.
I won't make any guarantees, but there's a reasonably high probability that I
won't even try to support the above, even if it's what the spec says in the end.
It's too much of a pain. Additionally, it disallows further expansion of the
colour statement with new keywords.
However, if we require the CODE keyword to come next, it would solve both
problems.
Actually, while it doesn't actually say one way or another, I would vote to have
the required parameters (CODE, VALUE, and EDGE) always be in the same order.
Any optional parameters should not be order-dependent, but I think the required
ones should be.
--Travis
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
| (...) I don't think so. What if CODE is part of the color name? I can't think of a quick example for that, but other key words are easy. AlphaTeamRed, BlueChrome... I'll support color names with no space characters, and I'll consider supporting (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
| (...) HTML uses # (...) The name should be the characters after the !COLOR keyword and before the next keyword. The only contraint I can think of is that is not be one of the other keywords. (...) ALPHA should apply to the VALUE color and the color (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
28 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
