On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Chris Ovenden wrote: > Interesting issue, and one I haven't given much thought to before. For > what it's worth I only use the colour keywords 'black' and 'white' (no > argument about what these mean!)
I do pretty much the same, though in tests and examples, 'red', 'yellow' and other names are convenient. They are a bit problematic in examples, of course. The names 'black' and 'white' are easy to remember, but actually '#000' and '#fff' are faster to type. Less self-explanatory, of course, but CSS isn't really meant to be read by people who don't know the idea of color codes. > But what about the three-digit hex contractions - ie #363 instead of > #336633? I love other CSS shortcuts, but for some reason this one > really irks me There is no difference (at least significant difference) in browser support, and the effect is of course exactly the same. There's the _psychological_ factor (as with the color names) that if you use the shortcuts (or names), you might be tempted to use only colors expressible with them. But this is neither a drawback nor a significant benefit with the shortcuts (though it might matter with the color names). If you use the shortcuts _only_, you are limiting yourself to 256 colors, which often isn't very restrictive but doesn't mean actual benefits either. The few devices that work with 256 colors (very old, misconfigured, or new special devices) will map other colors them, of course, instead of not "understanding" the long notation. -- Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
