Continuing the discussion from First-class colors (Part 1).
Previous discussions:
Do you think we should delete pigments?
yes
Yeah, I was thinking that because as @bh was saying
We are not mixing pigments on a screen, We mix light!
That means it would be easier to explain
It also makes sense because RGB is additive, it is based on LIGHT; Because of this, it is very easy to program, it also makes more sense.
but of course we could try to make it pigments, I just don't think it would be very helpful for programers.(And programmers are the main audience of snap)
Next time, could you just include what you were going to say as part of the "call"? I'll see it eventually and reply.
Anyway what do you need
I need this
bump.
Yes
They did ask bh
You may need to add the originals. (mix, color, etceteras)
Yes, MIX is missing. Right now I'm focusing on constructors and selectors.
(This is why I didn't post a link before -- this is not ready for review!)
Are there other missing functions whose domain and range are both colors, besides MIX? I suppose we should also have conversion to and from CMYK, but that's so messy -- you have to say what specific printer model you're using to get the conversion right in Photoshop.
Is there a "standard" printer set.
let's just use ISO/IEC 15948
I'm confused. That's the definition of the PNG file format. I don't think it includes a specific gamut, although it does include a provision for including gamut information in a PNG file.
I think if we were going to just pick one it'd have to be sRGB.
It would also be possible to ignore the problem and just define the CMY primaries as equal to the RGB secondaries, so Cyan is RGB 00ffff, Magenta is ff00ff, and Yellow is ffff00. In principle there's no need for black ink; that's just a concession to real chemistry.