> > > > Jon > > > > > > silly examples continue: > > > > > > <color space="rgb" r="1" g="2" b="3" name="123color" ... > > > <color space="cmyk" c="4" m="5" y="6" k="7" name="4567color" ... > > > <color space="hsv" h="8" s="9" v="10" name="8910color" ... > > > > This is the best spec I've every seen! JonCruz, what do you think > > of this easy to use color/swatch spec? > > Why not: > <space name="rgb"> > <color r="1" b="0.5" c="0.33333" name=... /> > <color r="1.0" b="1.0" c="0.33333" name=... /> > </space> > > After all..it s very much likely that one will have several color s in > the same colro space in a single palette.
Also possible... I guess > Also, what is the advantage of using tag attributes instead of tag > contents for the real values? Aren't we mssing something there? > Else, xml could all be attributes nand no content... but at elast I do > nnot see anything wrong with > > <space name="RGB"> > <color name="blue"><r>0.0</r><g>0.0</g><b>1.0</b></color> > </space> > > It might look verborragic..but then...why go XML anyway? With a lot of colours defined in a file (and Scribus will include all of the data in a document file), its getting to be a lot of extra data for no reason. Easy for a machine to read, but 7 vs 4 chars per value, per colour, is a lot of extra info for a human to process if editing by hand (and some people really want to be able to do this). Content vs attributes - I'm no XML guru whatsoever.. but still.. all those extra <>/.. ew Craig _______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
