The PHamlP functions did behave differently - that was my
misunderstanding; having come across this thread they now behave as
Sass.

I chose "absolute" to describe the way things happen as the amount of
change is absolute irrespective of the colour value (i.e. if
lightness($colour) == 60%, lighten($colour, 30%) gives
$lightness($colour) == 30%, and if lightness($colour) == 70%,
lighten($colour, 30%) gives $lightness($colour) == 40%), and
"relative" where the amount of change depends on the original colour
value, (i.e. if lightness($colour) == 60%, lighten($colour, 30%,
'true;) gives $lightness($colour) == 40%). But I'm certainly not going
to get hung up about the name; "proportional", "dependant" are another
couple of suggestions - must be loads more.

On Aug 29, 11:12 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote:
> Are you saying that the phamlp Sass functions behave differently than the
> standard ones? If so, that's a bug in the phamlp implementation and should
> be fixed.
>
> I don't believe that the word "relative" will adequately communicate to
> users what the difference between the two functions is. The current behavior
> is relative: lighten($color, 30%) makes $color 30% lighter, relative to its
> current lightness. Thus, neither adding a parameter named $relative nor
> adding versions of the function named "relative" will make it clear to the
> user what's going on.
>
> Triggering different behavior based on units and magnitude of the parameter
> is even more opaque to the user, especially given that decimal values and
> percentages are conceptually very similar.
>
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Chris Yates <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > Dam - just released PHamlP V3 and guess what? Yep - did the colour
> > functions as relative.
>
> > Two suggestions to cope with absolute and relative adjustment:
> > 1. add a SassBoolean as a 3rd optional parameter to darken(),
> > lighten(), saturate(), and desaturate(). If set true the adjustment is
> > a relative adjustment, if not given or set false it is an absolute
> > adjustment. That should mean existing code behaves as currently.
> > 2. add darken_rel(), lighten_rel(), etc.
>
> > For opacify() and transparentize() I think the answer is just look at
> > the adjustment value. If it's unitless and between 0 and 1 it's
> > absolute, a percentage means it's relative.
>
> > On Aug 26, 9:57 am, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > *Blade*: The summary: Sass/CSS use the word "saturation" in a different
> > way
> > > than Photoshop, as Eric said. When you change the lightness in Sass, it
> > > doesn't change the CSS saturation, but it does change the Photoshop
> > > saturation, because they're actually different definitions of
> > "saturation".
>
> > > You shouldn't have to use mix(). darken() actually does darken the color;
> > if
> > > that's what you're looking for, use darken(). Certainly don't use mix()
> > to
> > > get closer to the photoshop results, because it won't (or if it does
> > it'll
> > > be by accident).
>
> > > If someone's bored and wants to make a hsb plugin for Sass, tat would be
> > > pretty neat.
>
> > > *Eric*: If you can come up with a better name for the scaling versions of
> > > the functions, I'd be happy to have them in core. The problem is finding
> > a
> > > name that clearly conveys that it does the same thing but differently.
>
> > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 5:30 PM, BladeBronson <[email protected]
> > >wrote:
>
> > > > In my examples, I can see that SASS reports the same saturation value
> > > > for a color before and after it is darkened, but Photoshop reports a
> > > > difference. I barely understand why (grin), but it doesn't matter to
> > > > me. The SASS team has given this more thought than I have and I'm sure
> > > > it makes sense for darken() to work the way that it does. I'm able to
> > > > achieve the colors that I'm expecting by using mix() with a degree of
> > > > black instead of darken(), so I'm all set!
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Haml" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected] <haml%[email protected]>.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Haml" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected].
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en.

Reply via email to