Template talk:Color chart X11

Spacing & Layout

Is there a programming reason for having this chart in three columns? It runs over the edge of the normal text area on article pages. Could it be narrowed to two columns like this? The order of the color groups could be arranged however they need to be. This would result in the chart being longer, but staying within the article margins. - Tim D. Williamson ^yak-yak 01:42, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

@Timdwilliamson: Now that the template has survived a deletion attempt, it may make sense to put additional work into the formatting. To be mobile friendly, ideally the template should scale automatically to the width of the viewer's screen. That is, on a narrow screen (such as a cell phone) it should scale down to a single column, while showing more columns with higher resolutions and larger screens. I know this can be done, but I don't recall how to format it that way. I won't have time to work on it for a few more days, but if nobody has done anything with it before then, I'll try to find time on Sunday (2/28/16) to research that. Etamni | ✉ | ✓  22:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

It does need work. I've been out of town, and I've been working on some less technical pages. I'll get back to this one. Didn't know the columns could change sizes. - Tim D. Williamson ^yak-yak 05:23, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Recent formatting issues

@Grapesoda22: Have you looked at the Template:X11 color chart since you edited it earlier this week? Two out of the three headers are messed up, spacing-wise, and any colors with long names, such as MediumSlateBlue, have been reduced to borders. Not very useful for a color chart. If someone is looking at the chart for color reference, it seems like it would be helpful for the color to have prominence. Otherwise, what is the point of a color reference chart? I assume that you're trying to make the color names and codes more readable. Not sure, as there was no Edit Summary explaining the change. I reverted the changes, and you simply undid the revert without addressing the issues I mentioned in my summary. Looking forward to discussing this. I feel like there's probably some happy medium here, between whatever you were trying to achieve and what seemed to be a perfectly good color chart, but serial reverts aren't going to get us there. Thanks for your time. - Tim D. Williamson ^yak-yak 01:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

@Timdwilliamson:This was an attempt to make the page complaint with Wikipedia's AAA color restrictions. Grapesoda22 (talk) 04:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

@Grapesoda22: okay, I can see that. Maybe we can come up with a compromise that retains the necessary contrast that still results in a useable color chart. Maybe if we separate the color codes and names from the swatch? Something like Template:Colornames? - Tim D. Williamson ^yak-yak 04:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I'd be willing to do the work, if you can help me with the markup. I have hours at night that I can edit Wikipedia, but I'm rusty on my markup. Took a three year break from design after my son was born. - Tim D. Williamson ^yak-yak 04:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@Timdwilliamson: Ok, lets do it. Grapesoda22 (talk) 00:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Formatting proposal

At present the tables are formatted like:

Pink

FF C0 CB

255 192 203

This makes it difficult to see the colour being referred to, especially with the longest names which completely take up the column. It would surely be more sensible to remove the {code} containers, and replace them with an equivalent ("font-family: monospaced;" should work, but doesn't on my browser) and set the "color" to whatever contrasts best with the "background" (i.e. white for background colours with a gamma less than 128 (see here), black for those with a gamma of 128 or higher). Then the tables would look like:

Pink	FF C0 CB	255 192 203
Blue	00 00 FF	0   0 255

I would have made this change myself, but as it's such a drastic one (and as the proposed substitute for the {code} container isnt working for me) I have thrown it out for discussion. — Korax1214 (talk) 16:21, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Maybe naming specific monospaced fonts, as well as "monospaced" to cover the possibility that the named fonts aren't installed? That is to say, "font-family: Andale Mono, Courier, monospaced;", with the result as below? — Korax1214 (talk) 08:58, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Pink	FF C0 CB	255 192 203
Blue	00 00 FF	0   0 255

Textcolours (black/white) versus Background colours. Proposal to restore the old layout of the colour table

I used the (X11 color section of the) Webcolor page since many years as reference what text colour (black or white) is better readable for a certain background.

However, this major change

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AX11_color_chart&type=revision&diff=703389575&oldid=694187537

removed this extra information and broke in that way my "old" links (as a work-around I now link to the old version, but I don't like this).

Is someone of you supporting my proposal (here) to restore the old layout ?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikinaut (talk • contribs) 15:36, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Spacing

The Hex and Decimal columns are placed very closely and it’s hard to tell what column the bordering entries belong to. I recommend increasing the spacing or introducing separator(s) between the two columns. Idell (talk) 14:21, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@Idell for me there is a white separator between each row and each column. Do you not see them? It could be compatibility issue, since the separators are implemented in a deprecated way Walwal20 ^{talk ▾ contribs} 18:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)