Wouldn't documentation fix that? On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think "absolute" and "relative" clearly convey the difference. If > anything, I would guess that absolute-lighten($color, 40%) would set the > lightness of $color to 40%. > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Richard Aday <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> How about providing the context in the name of the mixin: >> >> absolute-lighten >> relative-lighten >> >> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > I'm not willing to compromise on usability and intuitiveness for the >> > sake of >> > powerful-but-obscure features. Sure, it may be easy for you or me or >> > someone >> > else reading this thread in detail to understand the difference between >> > lighten($color) and lighten($color, true). But what about people reading >> > your stylesheet later? What about users who want scaling behavior but >> > don't >> > know it? >> > >> > I think we can do better than lighten($color, true). I think we can come >> > up >> > with a way of expressing this that makes it at least somewhat clear >> > what's >> > going on for someone who hasn't read the documentation. And I'm >> > certainly >> > not willing to add a sub-par API in the meantime. >> > >> > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Eric Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Nathan, >> >> >> >> I agree but have a hard time seeing the issue when it comes to changes >> >> that don't affect default behavior. Half of CSS3 doesn't make sense >> >> unless you read the spec in detail. If you don't get it, don't use it. >> >> >> >> It also seems like a funny argument when it is clear that people don't >> >> grok the way it is now. >> >> >> >> Keeping default behavior the same, and adding an optional argument for >> >> those who do read the manual seems like a great step to me. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Aug 30, 1:29 am, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > 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. >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > 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. >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> -Richard Aday >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > -- > 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. >
-- -Richard Aday -- 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.
