[calsify] Proposed Errata for RFC 7986: COLOR property with arbitrary RGB values

Дилян Палаузов <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org> Thu, 28 June 2018 22:05 UTC

Return-Path: <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org>
X-Original-To: calsify@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: calsify@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 352D61310CC for <calsify@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 15:05:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=aegee.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1x7F0oTW4doq for <calsify@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 15:04:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.aegee.org (mail.aegee.org [144.76.142.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D4E01310D4 for <calsify@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 15:04:56 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: mail.aegee.org/w5SM4sGE029673; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=didopalauzov@aegee.org
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=aegee.org; s=k4096; t=1530223495; i=dkim+MSA-tls@aegee.org; r=y; bh=WaBjmSfjJwwWDNz7ywm0a4QN5Elrux9fqbRpw0sJliA=; h=Subject:From:To:Date; b=bpMX0srGRjh3Mckr/G4+62JTYGajz8tWnj7gZXBjLdfdEMeBdKpw2h0hSbS9vkW4F +faUCXI4Mmnjfp+ZIBJs0VOvhe+SvwOmEPsdWeo/SzjJo2lItwj3TTAgVRVOEpBwnM O1NIItgFVQ+OzNKUUF5oh5IPHinqzIFf2ZisThHlXNQ2QwQxKd7Zr/kHONgPmeglKv ROjXAyp15yhq2XlaXyQ60lgxI2SS9gru+O89vNqqFYup7WI121K23AT+zzBgSBlYlj RPeRePNeOCOp/sExIxRjIejr4/JHDGqdS8EVhJhbijvmMQX8cprx6NfSkOKlWvSQWV mn1BooKzOxePtE+HuNSwSToQCwBDuDsvoi00vUbam5AmbOLz3JfS6PGn6OIer3o+2M 8i7m/Z2UdLftrmpgcDOxRid9g9m5rXfuj0K5gYUNugeRlvAXB9FFcYYof/Z6AyRcyY 4DJThoJLQ5Lr7Z+eeI8ywHEcE503CeBnxcWEXFELE58dgIJqPAtmGcX+IXiCK733RH 2bR8LzbYmusUDJDrU+n+6Thd3VFVf+cCj7NqPdqJ0wk61CYxLkRuenl7TmoHRLi9r0 DJGBzEIxczeBQU+frybiu9fhIAmRH1K1HuRFBXN55AkjZC0YXFKEwIyvMp8NYLbrZR HzA35a0T+uxhcIUB2GHLclzg=
Authentication-Results: mail.aegee.org/w5SM4sGE029673; dkim=none
Received: from Tylan (80-110-70-89.cgn.dynamic.surfer.at [80.110.70.89]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.aegee.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w5SM4sGE029673 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for <calsify@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 22:04:55 GMT
Message-ID: <895f00bcf8af786b08011f8d3ee6f3cfd7f2f9f7.camel@aegee.org>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=94=D0=B8=D0=BB=D1=8F=D0=BD_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D0=BB=D0=B0=D1=83=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2?= <dilyan.palauzov@aegee.org>
To: calsify@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 22:04:54 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.100.0 at mail.aegee.org
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/calsify/lzvUSFAd6t4aAmR5cg8LgW05Pmw>
Subject: [calsify] Proposed Errata for RFC 7986: COLOR property with arbitrary RGB values
X-BeenThere: calsify@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: <calsify.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/calsify>, <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/calsify/>
List-Post: <mailto:calsify@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/calsify>, <mailto:calsify-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 22:05:01 -0000

Hello,

I would like to suggest the following Errata and welcome any comments
within a month.

My reading is that COLOR now cannot have the value RGB(61,211,68)

Please correct me, if I am wrong.

RFC 7986 (new Properties for iCalendar)  Section 5.9. COLOR Property
says:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7986#section-5.9

Type: Technical
Section: 5.9 COLOR Property

Origianl text:

Description:   ...The value is a case-insensitive color name taken from
the CSS3 set of names, defined in Section 4.3 of [W3C.REC-css3-color-
20110607].

Example:  The following is an example of this property:
   COLOR:turquoise

Corrected text:

Description:   ...The value is either a case-insensitive color name
taken from the CSS3 set of names, defined in Section 4.3 of [W3C.REC-
css3-color-20110607], or an RGB() functional  notation with absolute
values specified in Section 4.2.1 of the same document

Examples:  The following are examples of this property:
   COLOR:turquoise
   COLOR:rgb(61\,211\,68)

Notes for the errata:

draft-daboo-icalendar-extensions-07 removed the possibily to have RGB
colours for COLOR.

CSS3 included color names, that browsers at that time suppored,
originating from X11's rgb.txt.  The color names and values were
randomly chosen.  The minimal distance between the colors isn't
consistent.  One motivation for creating a color name were hardware
capabilities - an argument which isn't valid for 20 years now.  There
is no reason to limit the number of possible values for COLOR.  A user
interface for choosing a named color has either to offer the user the
possibility to choose from a pre-filled list of colors, which could
clutter the interface, or let the user choose any RGB color and narrow
it later to the closest color with CSS3 name.  This narrowing isn't
trivial and performing it seems like having an RFC running in itself.

Notes for this message, outside the errata:

Gnome Evolution recently added support for the COLOR property and
uploaded iCalendar files by it now have:
COLOR:rgb(61\,211\,68)

https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-css3-color-20110607/ lets also other
forms:
#f00
#ff0000
rgb(100%, 0%, 0%)

I have no propbem to let or exclude any of the forms above.  The main
challenge is neither to have the user chose from a final list of
colours, nor to let her choose any colour but narrow the selected
colour afterwards to something.  Letting more than one form of the
mentioned above would be overengineering for the mentined challanage.

https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2813 states the colours are
chosen randomly, and http://christopher.org/history-web-color-names/
proves this thesis.

Randomly choosen colour values (having names coming from rgb.txt) are
not suitable to achieve any aim.

I haven't worked with colour terms until today, so feel free to
rephrase the rgb-functional sentence.

Regards
  Дилян