The problem is I don't think any of these names adequately convey to a casual user who may not have read the documentation what the difference is between the two functions.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Chris Yates <[email protected]>wrote: > 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]>< > haml%[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] <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.
