Replies: 1 comment
|
From a programming perspective, having global names makes sense. I don't know about from the artist's perspective, I imagine it is restrictive. |
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
I opened a draft PR for this:
#530
The ULPC palettes or the "classic" LPC palettes have been less consistent than other palette sets, such as ElizaWy's LPCR palettes which are more standardized. Those palettes have categories based on the "type" of color, but every single palette has its own unique identifier.
The above PR is me working through naming conventions and trying to standardize the palette names so we can have an "all" selection for ULPC palettes as well. I'm getting really annoying constantly throwing out multiple sets of palettes for ULPC, such as throwing out metal and cloth both. Also, cloth really fits more of a "general" palette set than its name decides.
The skintone "light" works fine when exclusively looking at body colors, but it doesn't make sense when trying to label it as a palette in general. The same goes for "black", which is really more of a dark brown.
This is merely a draft idea, I am not saying we need to do this. And if we do it, we also need to implement some sort of forwarding system so the renamed palettes can be forwarded from the old names.
All reactions