Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

High Definition CSS Color Guide

developer.chrome.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 58 posts

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#21

Post by pquki4 »

Joke is on them to think I care about any of this when I work on my company-issued ThinkPad T14 with a 45% NTSC screen that maxes out at 300 nits.

Realistically, at this time, this is for developers who works on a MacBook and creates web pages for users that use MacBook or iPad Air/Pro. Most Windows laptops under $600 don't even have sRGB, and even some over $1k don't (like my ThinkPad). sRGB is often as good as it gets with regard to color gamut on (all) Windows laptops, P3 color coverage is very rare. Even more so for Chromebooks. When it comes to monitors, most target sRGB.

Of course what they are doing is important, but it will be a long time before most people can benefit from it.

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#22

Post by seanwilson »

lucideer wrote: post #20
seanwilson wrote: post #18

> The following color spaces offer access to larger gamuts than sRGB. The display-p3 color space offers almost twice as many colors as RGB, while Rec2020 offers almost twice as many as display-p3. That's a lot of colors! Are there any stats on how many people have devices that support these color spaces? Guessing you're not going to get a lot of brands picking p3 colors until it's widely supported by devices in gener…

p3 has been the default for Apple desktop & mobile displays since 2017 (iPhone 7 era). Other device manufacturers are more likely to have lagged on that but I would imagine a fair number would have added support since. Also, within CSS & browsers at least, the colours gracefully degrade based on the hardware, so using p3 in a supported browser is not going to look terrible on hardware without p3 support.

Is it fair to say the adoption rate in web design has been low? This is due to device, browser and tooling support or something else?

My general feeling working with designers and web developers is most aren't aware of p3. Figma only got p3 support around 9 months ago I think and Chrome around 1 year ago.

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#23

Post by lucideer »

seanwilson wrote: post #22
lucideer wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

p3 has been the default for Apple desktop & mobile displays since 2017 (iPhone 7 era). Other device manufacturers are more likely to have lagged on that but I would imagine a fair number would have added support since. Also, within CSS & browsers at least, the colours gracefully degrade based on the hardware, so using p3 in a supported browser is not going to look terrible on hardware without p3 support.

Is it fair to say the adoption rate in web design has been low? This is due to device, browser and tooling support or something else? My general feeling working with designers and web developers is most aren't aware of p3. Figma only got p3 support around 9 months ago I think and Chrome around 1 year ago.

I'd imagine it's largely just due to a combination of inertia & ignorance (though the lack of clarity around display support is almost certainly a factor too).

Apple made a song & dance about it 7 years ago but releases of supporting displays since have been relatively low-key & I'm not aware of any online reference table tracking them - so my guess that support is broad is just that, a guess. I know Samsung & OnePlus phones have it & I assume Pixels (not checked), but laptop adoption could be much lower.

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#24

Post by jameshart »

pquki4 wrote: post #21

Joke is on them to think I care about any of this when I work on my company-issued ThinkPad T14 with a 45% NTSC screen that maxes out at 300 nits. Realistically, at this time, this is for developers who works on a MacBook and creates web pages for users that use MacBook or iPad Air/Pro. Most Windows laptops under $600 don't even have sRGB, and even some over $1k don't (like my ThinkPad). sRGB is often as good as it g…

Mobile devices represent more than half of web traffic in general. Windows laptops are not the primary device CSS color support is trying to address.

Apple, Samsung and Google all ship devices with display P3 capable screens.

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#25

Post by jameshart »

eviks wrote: post #7

Why isn't there a more convenient okHSL/HSV way to input colors? (rather unfortunate such a bad format like RGB is so dominant)

OkLCH is the best version of that.

Sure, you have to worry about chroma limits, but they reflect the reality of color differences (blues are never going to be as vivid as greens)

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#26

Post by afavour »

klabb3 wrote: post #3

Surprising to see #rrggbbaa to be <1%, when #rrggbb is the most popular. If you’re already used to hex then why switch to eg rgba when you need alpha? I find it quite useful. Maybe it’s recent and less known.

I personally far prefer rgb() over #rrggbb, it’s really just muscle memory making me use the latter. So given that #rrggbbaa was introduced later, I don’t and won’t get that muscle memory.

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#28

Post by hwbunny »

klabb3 wrote: post #3

Surprising to see #rrggbbaa to be <1%, when #rrggbb is the most popular. If you’re already used to hex then why switch to eg rgba when you need alpha? I find it quite useful. Maybe it’s recent and less known.

99% of the new css features are not known or just unknown, because it's a hassle to use them. Syntax is just plain braindead. Just look at animations, grid and flexbox. These are supposed to fix lots of CSS2 era problems, and they do so in a mindboggingly shitty way. I mean anyone, who was responsible should be shot. And since it's a standard, it won't change for years to come.

So the idiots who established these new, contrived CSS syntaxes literally making people go on all fours, because... well, because they have the power to release such a mountain of shit.

Microsoft's Internet Explorer bullied every web developer for decades. Now Safari earned the honour of becoming the bully amongst web browsers, with their we just couldn't care less attitude. They do things here and there just a tad bit different, because, well, they are Apple, and everyone can fuck off. Like their fullscreen media query implementation, or the blur rendering outside viewport shenanigans just to name a few of their idiotic choices.

And Chrome... we need to wrestle away the browser from Google. The sooner, the better.

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#29

Post by eviks »

jameshart wrote: post #25
eviks wrote: post #7

Why isn't there a more convenient okHSL/HSV way to input colors? (rather unfortunate such a bad format like RGB is so dominant)

OkLCH is the best version of that. Sure, you have to worry about chroma limits, but they reflect the reality of color differences (blues are never going to be as vivid as greens)

it's similar to all the others: either a non-generally-human-comprehensible notation (how is pure red oklch(62.8% 0.25768330773615683 29.2338851923426) treating you?) or seriously flawed (like HSL)

Re: High Definition CSS Color Guide

#30

Post by eviks »

lifthrasiir wrote: post #8
eviks wrote: post #7

Why isn't there a more convenient okHSL/HSV way to input colors? (rather unfortunate such a bad format like RGB is so dominant)

The tracking issue: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8659 As noted there, okHSL/HSV keeps the perceptual uniformity by removing some peaks beyond the geometric limit of HSL/HSV, and it is unclear whether it is what users do expect or not.

that's such a minor issue compared to the fact that it's the only human-comprehensible notation (but one that fixes serious hsl/v flaws) that the original question still stands
Post reply on HN