elm-style-animation accepts the Color types from core as arguments for 
color property animations. So does my color mixing library (though who 
knows how many people use that :)  I'm working on another library that 
utilizes it as well.

Having a centralized idea of color seems like a pretty basic and useful 
thing to me, even if two prominent libraries don't use it directly.  Moving 
it to evancz/graphics means I have to either make my users depend on 
evancz/graphics(which doesn't make a ton of sense as they're probably using 
the html/svg libraries), or it means that every library that wants to work 
with color has to export their own type, which seems a bit much as well.

So, I guess I'm happy where it is:)

-Matt










On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 4:17:38 PM UTC-4, Nick H wrote:
>
> P.S. If this sounds like a good idea, I am happy to do the work.
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Nick H <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> Hi everybody,
>>
>> Since 0.18 is going to involve some module juggling in core, I thought 
>> this would be a good time to bring this up.
>>
>> This is a follow-up to an elm-discuss thread from last month. Robin 
>> argued that the Color module should not be in elm-lang/core. I agreed and 
>> suggested that it be moved to evancz/graphics.
>>
>> For me the strongest indicator that Color doesn't belong in core is to 
>> look at who depends on it. Neither of the UI-related elm-lang packages 
>> (html, svg) use it. elm-css and elm-mdl both define their own color types.
>>
>> The only library that operates well with Color is evancz/graphics. 
>> Furthermore, it is the only one that can use the entire thing. The Gradient 
>> type is opaque, so it's impossible for anyone but evancz/graphics to use it.
>>
>> I hate to suggest "one more thing" to add to the release, but it feels 
>> like low-hanging fruit. I'm sure there is a reason Color stayed behind when 
>> Graphics was extracted. One way or the other, it should be easy to decide. 
>> And if it makes sense to move it, the lack of dependencies means the change 
>> would be easy to implement.
>>
>> Thanks for humoring me,
>>
>> ~Nick
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm 
Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to