Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Carryover evaluation: Color Spaces and Functions #457

Closed
foolip opened this issue Sep 21, 2023 · 6 comments
Closed

Carryover evaluation: Color Spaces and Functions #457

foolip opened this issue Sep 21, 2023 · 6 comments
Labels
carryover-evaluation Evaluate whether to continue a focus area in the next year focus area: Color Spaces and Functions

Comments

@foolip
Copy link
Member

foolip commented Sep 21, 2023

Let's evaluate whether to continue the Color Spaces and Functions focus area in Interop 2024.

Original proposals:

Tests:

We should also consider whether we should add tests for 2024.

@foolip foolip added carryover-evaluation Evaluate whether to continue a focus area in the next year focus area: Color Spaces and Functions labels Sep 21, 2023
@foolip
Copy link
Member Author

foolip commented Sep 22, 2023

Something to consider if we continue this focus area is whether we should fold #426 into it.

@foolip
Copy link
Member Author

foolip commented Sep 22, 2023

A look through the unlabeled tests might also turn up valuable tests in case of scope expansion.

@svgeesus
Copy link

Something to consider if we continue this focus area is whether we should fold #426 into it.

That would make sense: Relative Color Syntax is now shipping in WebKit, being currently implemented in Blink and Mozilla has a favourable standards position and estimates implementation starting soon.

WPT for `currentColor in Relative Color Syntax were also recently added (the desired behavior is specc'ed and implementations agree, but currently fail those tests).

@jgraham
Copy link
Contributor

jgraham commented Sep 28, 2023

I'd strongly prefer to add things that are basically new features to new focus areas rather than adding additional scope to existing focus areas. There are two reasons for this:

  • It works better as a metric. If the new feature represents, say, 5% of the total tests it is going to drop the existing score by (about) 5%. For something that's already close to 100% that doesn't convey well that one feature is entirely missing.
  • It works better for the process / implementations. New features should be fully assessed alongside other proposals rather than being tacked on to existing focus areas.

I think extending focus areas only really makes sense where there are more tests for basically the same scope (e.g. adding new tests for flexbox or grid that still cover the same feature, just with additional coverage, as we did last year).

@svgeesus
Copy link

svgeesus commented Oct 4, 2023

I'd strongly prefer to add things that are basically new features to new focus areas

That seems very reasonable to me. And current WPT results for RCS would show a nice improvement from this starting position:

image

@vasilisvg
Copy link

I was pointed in this direction. I’m not sure if this is exactly the right place but …
I think focus from color functions should only be shifted when important bugs are fixed. There’s this bug in the implementation of (ok)lch that makes it impossible to really use it. And it may very well break websites that use (ok)lch once it’s fixed.

https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=255939
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1847421
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1440069&q=lch&can=2

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
carryover-evaluation Evaluate whether to continue a focus area in the next year focus area: Color Spaces and Functions
Projects
Status: Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants