* Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
@ 2013-08-21 0:25 Thangalin
2013-08-21 8:55 ` Hans Hagen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thangalin @ 2013-08-21 0:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ntg-context
Hi,
What would it take to extend \definecolor so that:
\definecolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1]
defines a new colour (ColourB) based on an existing colour (ColourA)?
I know that \definespotcolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1] works, but
it seems like \definecolor would also be a natural fit.
Kind regards.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
2013-08-21 0:25 Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour Thangalin
@ 2013-08-21 8:55 ` Hans Hagen
2013-08-21 11:11 ` Marco Patzer
2013-08-21 18:27 ` Thangalin
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 2013-08-21 8:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ntg-context
On 8/21/2013 2:25 AM, Thangalin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What would it take to extend \definecolor so that:
>
> \definecolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1]
>
> defines a new colour (ColourB) based on an existing colour (ColourA)?
>
> I know that \definespotcolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1] works, but
> it seems like \definecolor would also be a natural fit.
hm, afaik no one ever needed that (normally one defines colors once on
top of the document and there are seldom many of them)
anyhow, as general inheritance is pretty fuzzy i.e. cloning a spot color
and changing some rgb component or cloning a cmyk color and setting rgb
components it will not be a feature of definecolor
I've added \defineprocesscolor that cna be used as follows:
\starttext
\defineprocesscolor[red][r=.5]
\blackrule[color=red,width=\hsize,height=1cm]
\defineprocesscolor[redish][red][a=1,t=.5]
\blackrule[color=redish,width=\hsize,height=1cm]
\stoptext
But ... as there is some checking of the preferred color space (in
context each defined color has a preferred color space and there is also
a current colorspace that gets applied) you need to be aware of this:
\starttext
\defineprocesscolor[red][r=.5]
\blackrule[color=red,width=\hsize,height=1cm]
\defineprocesscolor[redish][red][a=1,t=.5]
\blackrule[color=redish,width=\hsize,height=1cm]
\defineprocesscolor[yellowish][red]
\blackrule[color=yellowish,width=\hsize,height=1cm]
\defineprocesscolor[yellowish][red][a=1,t=.5,y=.5]
\blackrule[color=yellowish,width=\hsize,height=1cm]
\defineprocesscolor[cyan][c=.5]
\defineprocesscolor[yellowish][cyan][y=.5]
\blackrule[color=yellowish,width=\hsize,height=1cm]
\stoptext
Now .. as you requested it, you're also the one who's going to wikify
it. I'll upload a beta later.
Hans
ps. Transparency operates independently of colors but I never figured
out a decent way to let that cooperate with existing colors that have
transparency specs without breaking compatibility so it might never
happen (in fact we have: current color space, current color, current
transparency).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
2013-08-21 8:55 ` Hans Hagen
@ 2013-08-21 11:11 ` Marco Patzer
2013-08-21 12:10 ` Hans Hagen
2013-08-21 14:23 ` Aditya Mahajan
2013-08-21 18:27 ` Thangalin
1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Marco Patzer @ 2013-08-21 11:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ntg-context
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1530 bytes --]
On 2013–08–21 Hans Hagen wrote:
> On 8/21/2013 2:25 AM, Thangalin wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >What would it take to extend \definecolor so that:
> >
> > \definecolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1]
> >
> >defines a new colour (ColourB) based on an existing colour (ColourA)?
> >
> >I know that \definespotcolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1] works, but
> >it seems like \definecolor would also be a natural fit.
>
> hm, afaik no one ever needed that (normally one defines colors once
> on top of the document and there are seldom many of them)
>
> anyhow, as general inheritance is pretty fuzzy i.e. cloning a spot
> color and changing some rgb component or cloning a cmyk color and
> setting rgb components it will not be a feature of definecolor
>
> I've added \defineprocesscolor that cna be used as follows:
Are you sure it's a good idea to add another colour definition
mechanism? Then we have
\definecolor
\defineglobalcolor
\definenamedcolor
\definespotcolor
\definemultitonecolor
\defineprocesscolor
This is getting a little confusing, in my opinion. If the only
difference between \definespotcolor and \defineprocesscolor is the
colour space check, can't that be dealt with using a key-value
setting?
Probably a little late to discuss this, but I also don't see why
\definespotcolor got its own command. A simpler approach: If two
arguments to \definecolor are provided you define a colour, if three
arguments are provided you define a tint of a colour.
Marco
[-- Attachment #1.2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 485 bytes --]
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
2013-08-21 11:11 ` Marco Patzer
@ 2013-08-21 12:10 ` Hans Hagen
2013-08-21 14:23 ` Aditya Mahajan
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 2013-08-21 12:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ntg-context
On 8/21/2013 1:11 PM, Marco Patzer wrote:
> On 2013–08–21 Hans Hagen wrote:
>
>> On 8/21/2013 2:25 AM, Thangalin wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> What would it take to extend \definecolor so that:
>>>
>>> \definecolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1]
>>>
>>> defines a new colour (ColourB) based on an existing colour (ColourA)?
>>>
>>> I know that \definespotcolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1] works, but
>>> it seems like \definecolor would also be a natural fit.
>>
>> hm, afaik no one ever needed that (normally one defines colors once
>> on top of the document and there are seldom many of them)
>>
>> anyhow, as general inheritance is pretty fuzzy i.e. cloning a spot
>> color and changing some rgb component or cloning a cmyk color and
>> setting rgb components it will not be a feature of definecolor
>>
>> I've added \defineprocesscolor that cna be used as follows:
>
> Are you sure it's a good idea to add another colour definition
> mechanism? Then we have
>
> \definecolor
the one i use
> \defineglobalcolor
the one no-one uses
> \definenamedcolor
just a sort of synonym one might forget about (compatibility)
> \definespotcolor
> \definemultitonecolor
special color spaces
> \defineprocesscolor
the one users might use
> This is getting a little confusing, in my opinion. If the only
> difference between \definespotcolor and \defineprocesscolor is the
> colour space check, can't that be dealt with using a key-value
> setting?
some are made for speed (when one changes colors a lot in local /
grouped cases)
> Probably a little late to discuss this, but I also don't see why
> \definespotcolor got its own command. A simpler approach: If two
> arguments to \definecolor are provided you define a colour, if three
> arguments are provided you define a tint of a colour.
well, more checking etc .. also some historic reasons as spot colors are
rather special in the sense that they have to built on others .. seldom
used anyway i guess
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
2013-08-21 11:11 ` Marco Patzer
2013-08-21 12:10 ` Hans Hagen
@ 2013-08-21 14:23 ` Aditya Mahajan
2013-08-21 15:18 ` Hans Hagen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2013-08-21 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mailing list for ConTeXt users
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1695 bytes --]
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Marco Patzer wrote:
> On 2013–08–21 Hans Hagen wrote:
>
>> On 8/21/2013 2:25 AM, Thangalin wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> What would it take to extend \definecolor so that:
>>>
>>> \definecolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1]
>>>
>>> defines a new colour (ColourB) based on an existing colour (ColourA)?
>>>
>>> I know that \definespotcolor[ColourA][ColourB][t=0.5, a=1] works, but
>>> it seems like \definecolor would also be a natural fit.
>>
>> hm, afaik no one ever needed that (normally one defines colors once
>> on top of the document and there are seldom many of them)
>>
>> anyhow, as general inheritance is pretty fuzzy i.e. cloning a spot
>> color and changing some rgb component or cloning a cmyk color and
>> setting rgb components it will not be a feature of definecolor
>>
>> I've added \defineprocesscolor that cna be used as follows:
>
> Are you sure it's a good idea to add another colour definition
> mechanism? Then we have
>
> \definecolor
> \defineglobalcolor
> \definenamedcolor
> \definespotcolor
> \definemultitonecolor
> \defineprocesscolor
>
> This is getting a little confusing, in my opinion. If the only
> difference between \definespotcolor and \defineprocesscolor is the
> colour space check, can't that be dealt with using a key-value
> setting?
>
> Probably a little late to discuss this, but I also don't see why
> \definespotcolor got its own command. A simpler approach: If two
> arguments to \definecolor are provided you define a colour, if three
> arguments are provided you define a tint of a colour.
Its time for a `simplecolor` module and a `\definesimplecolor` command :)
Aditya
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 485 bytes --]
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
2013-08-21 14:23 ` Aditya Mahajan
@ 2013-08-21 15:18 ` Hans Hagen
2013-08-21 15:28 ` Aditya Mahajan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 2013-08-21 15:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ntg-context
On 8/21/2013 4:23 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
> Its time for a `simplecolor` module and a `\definesimplecolor` command :)
Well, I suppose most users use just \definecolor as spot colors are
something one only will use in special cases, in which the color setup
only uses spot colors then. Also, inheritance has never been requested
before so that's why I made a separate command, if only to avoid side
effects.
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
2013-08-21 15:18 ` Hans Hagen
@ 2013-08-21 15:28 ` Aditya Mahajan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2013-08-21 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mailing list for ConTeXt users
On 2013-08-21, at 11:18 AM, Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:
> On 8/21/2013 4:23 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
>
>> Its time for a `simplecolor` module and a `\definesimplecolor` command :)
>
> Well, I suppose most users use just \definecolor as spot colors are something one only will use in special cases, in which the color setup only uses spot colors then. Also, inheritance has never been requested before so that's why I made a separate command, if only to avoid side effects.
I understand, and I was joking.
Aditya
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
2013-08-21 8:55 ` Hans Hagen
2013-08-21 11:11 ` Marco Patzer
@ 2013-08-21 18:27 ` Thangalin
2013-08-21 22:06 ` Hans Hagen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thangalin @ 2013-08-21 18:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mailing list for ConTeXt users
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 913 bytes --]
For context, here is the question on TeX.SE:
http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/129297/define-colour-transparency-in-relation-to-existing-colour
I agree with Marco:
Are you sure it's a good idea to add another colour definition
> mechanism? Then we have
>
\definecolor
\defineglobalcolor
\definenamedcolor
\definespotcolor
\definemultitonecolor
\defineprocesscolor
That is a little confusing. I can understand a speed requirement, but
surely that can be taken into consideration beneath the definition?
\definecolor[A][r=1, g=0, b=0]
\definecolor[B][A][a=1, t=0.5]
That seems fairly reasonable. Also, why not embed colour spaces within the
command?
\definecolor[A][colorspace=spot]
\definecolor[A][colorspace=multitone]
\definecolor[A][colorspace=pantone]
One command to define a colour, rather than several commands for specific
variations of defining colours.
Kind regards.
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1444 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 485 bytes --]
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour
2013-08-21 18:27 ` Thangalin
@ 2013-08-21 22:06 ` Hans Hagen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 2013-08-21 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ntg-context
On 8/21/2013 8:27 PM, Thangalin wrote:
> For context, here is the question on TeX.SE:
>
> http://tex..stackexchange.com/questions/129297/define-colour-transparency-in-relation-to-existing-colour
> <http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/129297/define-colour-transparency-in-relation-to-existing-colour>
>
> I agree with Marco:
>
> Are you sure it's a good idea to add another colour definition
> mechanism? Then we have
>
> \definecolor
> \defineglobalcolor
> \definenamedcolor
> \definespotcolor
> \definemultitonecolor
> \defineprocesscolor
As said before:
\defineglobalcolor : probably no one (besided me) will use that
\definenamedcolor : an historic synonym
so we have less commands. As spot and multitone colors are rather
special, they have their own commands. In fact, you can stick to
\definespotcolor
\definemultitonecolor
\defineprocesscolor
if you like and forget about the rest.
MkIV: Much color related code sits at the Lua end and for some color
spaces a bit extra info needs to be passed. Also, spot and multitone
colors are always global. Combining all in one command is of course
doable but deu to the fact that we end up with extra analysis at the tex
end it would make the code more complex then I'd like with hardly any
gain (and it would also make the command less efficient for local use).
The average user will probably only use \definecolor and that one
already has to take a lot into account, for instance mixed colors
\definecolor[whatever][.5(red,green)]
and some special tikz cases, which, in a combined command would mean
that a second argument can be a parent color (needs to be resolved at
the tex end before defining) or a mix specification or ...
MkII: the definition has been made efficient by assuming a limited set
of known keys.
> That is a little confusing. I can understand a speed requirement, but
> surely that can be taken into consideration beneath the definition?
>
> \definecolor[A][r=1, g=0, b=0]
> \definecolor[B][A][a=1, t=0.5]
>
> That seems fairly reasonable. Also, why not embed colour spaces within
> the command?
>
> \definecolor[A][colorspace=spot]
> \definecolor[A][colorspace=multitone]
> \definecolor[A][colorspace=pantone]
> One command to define a colour, rather than several commands for
> specific variations of defining colours.
Putting too much in one command makes it harder to extend and more
difficult to implement. Maybe
\definecolor [colorspace] [A] ....
but again, it would be tricky to get that compatible. Maybe at some
point \definecolor can become equal to the just introduced
\defineprocesscolor ... but not now
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-08-21 22:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-08-21 0:25 Feature Request: define colour in relation to existing colour Thangalin
2013-08-21 8:55 ` Hans Hagen
2013-08-21 11:11 ` Marco Patzer
2013-08-21 12:10 ` Hans Hagen
2013-08-21 14:23 ` Aditya Mahajan
2013-08-21 15:18 ` Hans Hagen
2013-08-21 15:28 ` Aditya Mahajan
2013-08-21 18:27 ` Thangalin
2013-08-21 22:06 ` Hans Hagen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).