Talk:Web colors/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2

Black/Key

For those learning the Cyan Magenta Yellow Key (CMYK) color scale, would it not be useful to provide at least a label on black that states it alternatively could be referred to as "key" in much the same way that "aqua" is referred to as cyan? If so, how would we go about editing the table on the page? I tried to do so but it's set up in a way that is not conducive to editing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.10.178 (talk) 09:21, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Color

Three reasons for spelling it "color" in the article:

  1. that's the way it's spelled in the article title
  2. that's the way it's spelled in HTML
  3. that's the way it's spelled in CSS

Paul A 09:02, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I'll grant you #1. But HTML attribute and CSS names are not to dictate spelling, that some of them resemble words is more an artifact of the fact they were created by (US English speaking) persons than an argument for or against any form of spelling. Personally I find color a detestable spelling corruption, but no need to get in an edit fight over this. If the article hadn't existed yet I'd have put it at 'Web colours'. —Jor 17:54, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The people who created it were not necessarily US English speaking. Indeed of the four editors of CSS2 their native languages were Norwegian, Dutch, UK English and US English. W3C specifications are however written in US-English as a matter of policy.

And #2 is just plain wrong. Tannin
In what way is it wrong? --Paul A 04:06, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Oh no. Not another Colour v Color debate... sigh UncleMontezuma 12:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Dude, three years ago... ¦ Reisio 15:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh yeh...UncleMontezuma 16:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
lol Rocket000 (talk) 05:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Aqua & Cyan

Has anyone noticed yet that aqua and cyan are listed as identical? (#00FFFF) Is that deliberate? Kim Bruning 08:50, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Yes, "aqua" and "cyan" both refer to #00FFFF. --Paul A 04:08, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Yes "aqua" is the standard name (and the only one supported) in HTML3, HTML4 and CSS 1.0. "cyan" is the prefered name in usual colorimetry or in RGB monitor technologies and in the sRGB standard color space, it is added as an alias of "aqua" only in SVG 1.0 and CSS 3, but only for the full profile (but not in CSS 2.0 or 2.1, even though most browsers also recognize "cyan" (just like they also accept "grey" instead of the standard "gray", and "orange" for those browsers that are complying to CSS 2.1 where "orange" was added). You could also add the term "green" (of CRT monitors) which is "lime" in HTML3+ and CSS., or "magenta "(which is not standard in HTML/CSS) that is a more recent aliaspermitted in CSS 3/SVG 1.0 (but since long in many browsers) of "fuchsia" (which was standardized very early in HTML4 (and used since even longer in browsers using the partially standardized HTML 3 version or previously non-standardized versions of HTML).
See the W3G documentation about CSS for the detail of CSS profiles and why you should not assume that browsers will support other color names than just the 16 standard colors of HTML4 (think about browsers with reduced profiles that are still fully compliant to the latest standard. For all colors other than the 16 standard ones, you should use numeric values :
  • either the "#rrggbb" or "#rgb" hex triplets, or the "rgb(r,g,b)" decimal notation (both notations living in the reliable sRGB color space)
  • or the standardized "hsl(h,s,l)" numeric notation (that lives in the HSL colorspace that is directly linked to the sRGB colorspace with a simple and fully reversible transform described by the W3C).
  • Don't use other color spaces in HTML or CSS, unless you know precisely for which device you are targetting the result (for example don't use the HSV colorspace which is not always fully reversible).
Note however that the term "cyan" is also defined quite differently in monitor technologies (notably in CRT), because it refers to the brightest combination of the "two" blue and "green" luminophores (and also because the "blackness" of the rest of the screen surface is defined differently), that may not necessarily have a pure color in the sRGB colorspace: CRT monitors are applyng some colorspace transforms to convert their sRGB input to the device colorspace, using CIE-based conversions. Note that digital TV uses also other colorspaces (which are different between PAL, SECAM and NTSC) in order to adapt to different transmission bandwidths (the frequency color channels that are transported over the main frequency carrier are distributed differently, but also the older CRT monitors and TV had different luminophores that do not match today the three standardized fundamental colors of the sRGB colorspace used now in numeric TV and video formats. "cyan" is considered equivalent to "aqua", only because it applies today to modern monitors that use technologies that are compliant now with the standardized sRGB colorspace. The same remark would also apply to "red", "yellow", "green", "blue", which are different in the sRGB colorspace and in the physical screen surface of CRT displays. Note also that, even if CSS3 has now accepted the X11 color names, there is still some differences (the article speaks about the .Net difference (bug or feature?). verdy_p (talk) 03:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

List of colors

The list of colors needs some values filled in by persons who know how to find out the RGB, CMYK and HSV values for various colors. Tuf-Kat 01:20, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)

The RGB values are already given. CMYK depends on which set of inks, what sort of paper, etc. HSV is marginally useful as a visual selection mechanism but the actual numerical values are not especially useful.

Table

At Dutch wikipedia we worked hard on the color table. Maybe you like it too. The first column should be removed. Ellywa 05:04, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Dutch name
HTML
name
R G B
Hex code
Color
example
Red colors
indianen rood Indianred CD 5C 5C  
licht koraal Lightcoral F0 80 80  
zalm Salmon FA 80 72  
donker zalm Darksalmon E9 96 7A  
oranjerood Orangered FF 45 00  
rood Red FF 00 00  
vermiljoen Crimson DC 14 3C  
baksteen Firebrick B2 22 22  
donker rood Darkred 8B 00 00  
Pink colors
roze Pink FF C0 CB  
licht roze Lightpink FF B6 C1  
  Palevioletred DB 70 93  
acaciaroze Hotpink FF 69 B4  
dieproze Deeppink FF 14 93  
middenvioletrood Mediumvioletred C7 15 85  
Yellos colors
licht geel Lightyellow FF FF E0  
  Lemonchiffon FF FA CD  
  Lightgoldenrodyellow FA FA D2  
  Papayawhip FF EF D5  
  Moccasin FF E4 B5  
  Peachpuff FF DA B9  
  Palegoldenrod EE E8 AA  
kaki Khaki F0 E6 8C  
geel Yellow FF FF 00  
goud Gold FF D7 00  
donker kaki Darkkhaki BD B7 6B  
Bleu colors
licht cyaan Lightcyan E0 FF FF  
  Paleturquoise AF EE EE  
cyaan Aqua 00 FF FF  
aquamarijn Aquamarine 7F FF D4  
turquoise Turquoise 40 E0 D0  
  Mediumturquoise 48 D1 CC  
donker turquoise Darkturquoise 00 CE D1  
  Powderblue B0 E0 E6  
staalblauw Lightsteelblue B0 C4 DE  
licht blauw Lightblue AD D8 E6  
hemelsblauw Skyblue 87 CE EB  
licht hemelsblauw Lightskyblue 87 CE FA  
hemelsblauw Deepskyblue 00 BF FF  
korenbloemblauw Cornflowerblue 64 95 ED  
donkerstaalblauw Steelblue 46 82 B4  
  Cadetblue 5F 9E A0  
  Mediumslateblue 7B 68 EE  
  Dodgerblue 1E 90 FF  
koninklijk blauw Royalblue 41 69 E1  
blauw Blue 00 00 FF  
middenblauw Mediumblue 00 00 CD  
donker blauw Darkblue 00 00 8B  
marine Navy 00 00 80  
nachtblauw Midnightblue 19 19 70  
Orange colors
licht zalm Lightsalmon FF A0 7A  
oranje Orange FF A5 00  
donker oranje Darkorange FF 8C 00  
koraal Coral FF 7F 50  
tomaat Tomato FF 63 47  
oranjerood Orangered FF 45 00  
Green colors
groengeel Greenyellow AD FF 2F  
groen Chartreuse 7F FF 00  
grasgroen Lawngreen 7C FC 00  
  Lime 00 FF 00  
bleekgroen Palegreen 98 FB 98  
licht groen Lightgreen 90 EE 90  
middenlentegroen Mediumspringgreen 00 FA 9A  
lentegroen Springgreen 00 FF 7F  
  Yellowgreen 9A CD 32  
  Limegreen 32 CD 32  
  Mediumseagreen 3C B3 71  
zeegroen Seagreen 2E 8B 57  
bosgroen Forestgreen 22 8B 22  
donker groen Green 00 80 00  
  Olivedrab 6B 8E 23  
olijfgroen Olive 80 80 00  
donkerolijfgroen Darkolivegreen 55 6B 2F  
donkergroen Darkgreen 00 64 00  
aquamarijn Aquamarine 7F FF D4  
  Mediumaquamarine 66 CD AA  
donker zeegroen Darkseagreen 8F BC 8F  
licht zeegroen Lightseagreen 20 B2 AA  
donker cyaan Darkcyan 00 8B 8B  
  Teal 00 80 80  
Purple colors
lavendel Lavender E6 E6 FA  
distel Thistle D8 BF D8  
pruim Plum DD A0 DD  
violet Violet EE 82 EE  
fuchsia Fuchsia FF 00 FF  
magenta magenta FF 00 FF  
orchidee Orchid DA 70 D6  
  Mediumorchid BA 55 D3  
  Mediumpurple 93 70 DB  
  Slateblue 6A 5A CD  
  Blueviolet 8A 2B E2  
donker violet Darkviolet 94 00 D3  
  Darkorchid 99 32 CC  
  Darkmagenta 8B 00 8B  
purper Purple 80 00 80  
  Darkslateblue 48 3D 8B  
  Indigo 4B 00 82  
Brown colors
  Cornsilk FF F8 DC  
  Blanchedalmond FF EB CD  
  Bisque FF E4 C4  
  Navajowhite FF DE AD  
  Wheat F5 DE B3  
  Burlywood DE B8 87  
  Tan D2 B4 8C  
  Rosybrown BC 8F 8F  
  Sandybrown F4 A4 60  
  Goldenrod DA A5 20  
  Darkgoldenrod B8 86 0B  
  Peru CD 85 3F  
chocoladebruin Chocolate D2 69 1E  
  Saddlebrown 8B 45 13  
roodbruin Sienna A0 52 2D  
bruin Brown A5 2A 2A  
kastanjebruin Maroon 80 00 00  
White colors
wit White FF FF FF  
sneeuwwit Snow FF FA FA  
  Honeydew F0 FF F0  
  Mintcream F5 FF FA  
  Azure F0 FF FF  
  Aliceblue F0 F8 FF  
  Ghostwhite F8 F8 FF  
rookwit Whitesmoke F5 F5 F5  
schelp Seashell FF F5 EE  
beige Beige F5 F5 DC  
kant Oldlace FD F5 E6  
  Floralwhite FF FA F0  
  Ivory FF FF F0  
  Antiquewhite FA EB D7  
linnen Linen FA F0 E6  
  Lavenderblush FF F0 F5  
  Mistyrose FF E4 E1  
Grey colors
  Gainsboro DC DC DC  
licht grijs Lightgrey D3 D3 D3  
zilver Silver C0 C0 C0  
donker grijs Darkgray A9 A9 A9  
grijs Gray 80 80 80  
  Dimgray 69 69 69  
  Lightslategray 77 88 99  
  Slategray 70 80 90  
  Darkslategray 2F 4F 4F  
zwart Black 00 00 00  


I don't see any actual color samples. Maybe where all the white space is on the right side, include a sample of the color? I recommend 256-color GIF images to ensure that the color is seen on all browsers. I see color bands only on my PocketPC browser.
  • The current article shows color samples directly with web colors (the hex digits are in colored boxes in at least some browsers). I think that is safer than using a GIF which may be subject to a different color management regime. Notinasnaid 12:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


  • I have just implemented this table

007bond 00:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

  • After a false start, I have cross checked (with software, not by eye) against the names in the CSS specification. There were some corrections, which someone may wish to carry back to the original: Deleted duplicate Aquamarine, OrangeRed. Added missing Cyan, LightSalmon. I also restored the original case as used by the specification. Note that I have only checked the names for an exact match, not the color values at this stage. I wonder what to do about X11 Color Names (which is the same list except it is missing LightSalmon; only that isn't really the list of colors used by X11, it's the web subset). Notinasnaid 18:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you ILovEPlankton 18:54, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I really like this table sorted by color groups. Thanks for adding it! :-) I am curious about something. Some of the "gradients" ("lightness" to darkness" ?) seem to be a bit discordant to me. Do these groups follow an established sequence? Would it be possible to re-sort some of them in a "smoother" intensity gradient? I could "eyeball" it, but that would be rather subjective. Thanks for your thoughts. Rfrisbietalk 20:06, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

If it comes to preferences, I'd like to see it in alphabetical order. By grouping it in this way aren't we getting into original research? Notinasnaid 07:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Editorial decisions about presentation style hardly seems like original research to me. I'm sure there are all sorts of chromatic progressions that are well established in the field of color analysis. An alphabetical ordering seems to be about as arbitrary as it gets. Anyway it was just a thought. If it's that big a deal, I'll just reorder them for myself somewhere else. Rfrisbietalk 10:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

How many colors?

Am I correct in believing there are exactly 16,777,216 different colors available on the web? If so, maybe we'd like to mention this arcane fact in the article. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 30 June 2005 15:27 (UTC)

No, its incorrect. Its the number of different values in a system that uses 8 bits per color component. Of those, some wil appear indistinguishable and others will show severe banding. The Web allows arbitrary precision for color values, using the rgb(R%, G%, B%) syntax. Some devices have only 5 bits per component, and some have 10 or more. So, 16,777,216 is not a fundamental attribute of colors on the Web. --Nantonos 20:34, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes. I added it. --Heron 30 June 2005 21:30 (UTC)
On a 24-bit (8 bits per component) display system, yes. Depending on how the monitor is set up, not all of those may be distinguishable; and some may show objectionable banding. There have been 10 bits per component (30 bit) display systems available for some time now. On mobile devices, 5 bits per component (15 bit) or 5-6-5 (16 bit) is common. Whether such systems are used to display "the Web" or to display some other content does not affect the number of colors available. --Nantonos 01:00, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
I know I may be wrong, but notice the article says "It should be mentioned that all color values from #000000 - #FFFFFF (16,777,215 colors) are valid." Wouldn't that be incorrect, as 255³ = 16,581,375? Again, I know that I'm the one who's most likely wrong, and that someone would have noticed by now if the stated number of colors was incorrect, but I just wanted to ask. -- The M.P. 22:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Wait, nevermind. That's not my question anymore. Now my question is, how could you even convert a color to decimal if it had more than 255 Red, Green, or Blue? 00 - FF is only 255 hex triplets. -- The M.P. 22:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh man. I am so sorry for wasting your time if you're reading this... I was stupid. I completely forgot that 00 - FF is actually 256 hex triplets. ugh... sorry. -- The M.P. 22:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate Entry: Orangered

The color 'Orangered' is in the list twice. Should it be removed, or is it duplicated because it is part of both the orange section and the red section? --Topaz 06:37, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Double Entry

Is it just me or are magenta and fuchsia supposed to have the same code?? The Fuchsia (color) article states that the code is #F400A1 (but it does mention magenta's hex triplet as well). Not sure what to do, so I'll leave it up to those who'd know better. --Dupz

It's correct as it is: both are defined as #FF00FF for the purpose of this article. The #FA00A1 in the colour box on the Fuchsia (color) page is just the code for the arbitrary shade of fuschia used in that box. --Zundark 16:31, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

2l6 vs 256

How many web safe colors are out there? 216 or 256? I'm trying to implement them on a jsp program but i'm not sure of what the exact number is. I am still not clear , ever after reading the article. It says that it's 216 because up to 20 colors are used by the operating system. Xhamlliku

There are 216 colors. In hexadecimal, any combination of 00,33,66,99,CC,FF produce a web safe color. I also notice the article states Lynda Weinman was the first to identify this palette. However, if you follow the link to her page, it says:

'Lynda Weinman is a leading author on web design and web graphics. She first publicized the "web-safe" color palette first discovered by Bruce Heavin.' Victor Engel 01:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC) (author of The Browser Safe Palette, http://the-light.com/netcol.html)

X11 Color Names

I believe we should add a link to X11 color names and develop that page instead of listing the colors here. X11 color names have more applications then web design and it doesn't make sense to duplicate the list, nor to REDIRECT "x11 color names" to this page. What do you think? Matveims 02:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I changed the table of the X11 colors so that it was sorted in Alphabetical order. I also put it into 3 columns in stead of 2 because there is room for it, and to shorten the page. Does anyone know why this was edit was reverted? 007bond 01:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Because it is easier for users to find a certian color when it is color coded, and much harder when it is alphabetical, and also your three colomns don't fit on a 800x600 moniter. ILovEPlankton 01:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

That is fair enough. Another reccomendation: there is a table above that was completed in the dutch wikipedia that someone kindly copied across for us to use. Are we going to make use of this? 007bond 01:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

If you would like to implement it I would not mind. ILovEPlankton 01:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
I have just implemented the above table. I'm surprised no did it before me, it's been up for ages.
I think people have just been lazy to remove the dutch names.
Upon looking at the actual X11 color names page, I found a similar table that had the RGB values included.
Having already took the time to delete dutch names, I'm not going to go through and add them in, but if someone else could that would be great

007bond 00:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


I recently found the color code #DDCDFF in a template here in Wikipedia, but it is not listed in this article, or any other article I've found that lists X11 color names. By looking at it, it looks like a shade of purple, but I don't know the name. Could someone let me know in my talk page? Same goes for #FDFDFD, which looks like an off-white. Thanks. --JFred 03:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

There are 16 million color codes available, and only a few hundred names, so there is no particular reason to assume that these colors do have names at all. Notinasnaid 06:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Converting RGB to hexadecimal

The article mentions the Windows calculator converts RGB colors to hex. Would anyone object to mentioning that Apple computers since early 2004 were bundled with Art Directors Toolkit that performs RGB to Hexadecimal conversion?

http://www.code-line.com/software/applebundle4/ Dedwarmo 04:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I remedied this problem in what I hope is a cleaner way. Hardwick 23:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Hex triplet is a six-digit, three-byte hexadecimal number, giving us 16 million colors.

It's a simple equation for a computer to compute this number and display it. If the computer is not sufficiently capable of displaying this many colors, the computer compensates and dithers the color or replaces the color.

Instead, use Web Safe colors as a guideline. For instance, say you are making a website with blue, photo-realistic toolbars. Compare the "blue" of your design to the "blues" available in the X11 color names list.

Then, select the closest matching blue and colorize your website to match. This will allow you to have a website with 16 million colors, while taking other computer's display capabilities into consideration.

Woah.

Hey, you guys rock. This is a pretty amazing page. Definitely must have been a piece of work to do. Keep up the good work. 69.160.0.227 00:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Undid change to make X11 colors "main article"

I undid a change which set up X11 colors as the main article. This is because that describes, well, the colors in X11, while this article describes the colors that the HTML/CSS standards refer to. These are not the same list, as reference 3 indicates. I have also updated the X11 colors article to reflect this ambiguity, since people may find it first and try to use it as a reference for web design. Notinasnaid 09:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Something is amiss with this section. If X11 color names, the article, is about a different topic than Web colors#X11 color names, the section, then the section is mislabeled. I followed accepted wikistyle to note the reference to the main article with a well-accepted template. Please change the name of this section to something that is more descriptive. Also, please move the external link out of the section. It is poor style as well. It should be cited as a reference. Rfrisbietalk 11:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
It is about a very closely related topic. But (a) it overlaps in a complex way, so that can't really be said to be the main article; this is equally the main article for that. (b) that article did not (and still does not) contain an equivalent alphabetical list. I hope my recent edits to X11 color names have made the differences clearer. Notinasnaid 12:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
I'll admit that I still need to let the nuances soak in, but your edits help. Thanks! :-) However, because the topics are so similar yet different, I still recommend the section title be changed slightly to reflect the distinction with the article (a "section" is not an "article"), such as "X11 colors in the CSS3 specification." Also, an external link does not belong in a section other than in something like References or External links. It still needs to be moved. Rfrisbietalk 14:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Removing external links

I have removed a few external links and some have been reverted, so here is a proposal instead. I propose to remove the external link to List of web colors - "a more complete list". The reason for this is it just seems to be a collection of names of colors with RGB values; why is this one notable? The names used don't match HTML standards, and most don't seem to work in practice either. The page does not make this clear. Hence I don't think it meets Wikipedia's requirements for external links. Notinasnaid 13:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

By the way, the edit summary asked "why are you removing references". I am not; references are a serious matter, and should only be removed if the relevant part of the article no longer exists, making the reference obsolete, or if a better reference is found. What I am removing is simply an external link. Notinasnaid 13:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
You've removed all the links except for "CSS2.1 Color Specification" which is more of a css specification and offers little more than is found here on web colors. I think a color chart with rgb codes would be a much better resource for web developers and the like. css is not the web colors standard. Im putting back two color charts.
I disagree. CSS and HTML are the only web color standards. But please continue the debate. Notinasnaid 09:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
You said "This is a complete list of the colors in a published specification. Please do not add new ones not in the specification." That is A specification. Not THE specification. Web colors includes all RGB colors from #000000 - #FFFFFF not just those in the cascading style sheet specification, or the XML specification, or any specification in limited use.
Do you propose that this article list all of the 24 million possible colors, or just people's favourites? What is the benefit of including other colors, and what would your source be? In any case, the new color I removed was added to a section which specifically said, and was sourced, as the CSS color list: as such the removal was absolutely necessary, because the change meant Wikipedia was claiming the added color was part of the CSS list, and it wasn't. Notinasnaid 08:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
No im not saying the article should list all 24m(Its 16.7m btw). Just maybe links to pages with more than the ~250 on the page, and the 17 in the css spec. This page only mentions "named" and "web safe" colors, which here in 2006 are of debatable value.
What is the benefit of including other colors, and what would your source be?
IMO Web Site designers finding this page would get just as much if not more use from charts with a few thousand web colors than a css spec with 17 colors. If this article is about the specifications of including colors in web pages it is just as much about the colors themselves. Im not saying remove the css spec, I think they both have merit. And so does the html spec. You could even argue Flash and the like are web color specs.
the new color I removed was added to a section which specifically said, and was sourced, as the CSS color list: as such the removal was absolutely necessary, because the change meant Wikipedia was claiming the added color was part of the CSS list, and it wasn't.
I thought you were referring to the external links. my mistake
Removed links which aren't part of the specification.
The specification for web colors are all those from #000000-FFFFFF not just those with names. Youve already said your aware of this. "Do you propose that this article list all of the 24 million possible colors...." This article is about web colors, not just the web color specifications.

Colors Named Correctly

Am I color blind? Because, the specific colors below just don't look right to me. Please refer to article and talk page.

Chocolate :: It seriously looks 'orange-ish' to me.

Brown :: Umm... I see more of a pinkish red and not Brown.

I came here looking for some color pattern's b/c I was trying to find Orange-Red which I did and was going over the other colors. Is it seriously just me or are the colors wrong?

lol! Hopefully someone get's back to me here soon :) Thanks! sid007 05:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Chocolate looks like a rather warm caramel. Brown is a rather mahogany kind of color. It's always possible someone could have tampered with the article, but I think it is right. You can always follow the reference to http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-css3-color-20010305#x11-color, which is the official specification of these colors; they look the same there. Always bear in mind, too, that colors won't look the same on all computers. When designing web pages you can't be sure what other people will see. Notinasnaid 08:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Light Salmon in X11

The X11 categories are nice -- Light Salmon belongs to 2 categories (Red and Orange). Is that a mistake or purposeful for a non-exclusive categorization?

Regards,

monte

{x:

MonteShaffer 20:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

256 Color chart

I don't know if this would be helpful or not but I developed a 256 color chart for my own use that shows the combined intensity of each color from 0 to 15 - with 15 being white(FF,FF,FF) and 14 being one value away in each of the main colors i.e. (CC,FF,FF); (FF,CC,FF); and (FF,FF,CC). It is available here - User:Trödel/Color chart (8-bit) ----Trödel 17:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I reckon your chart – which looks like great work – ought to be available to users via at least a link from this page, if not on the page itself (I don't know whether or not it would qualify as a "Web colors" chart...?). If it isn't included on the page, please create Chart of 8-bit colors or the like; in the meantime, the current version is now linked in my reference area. Thanks for your work!  David Kernow (talk) 18:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

the link to 'list of colors' was labeled as 'list of articles about color'... very different things. 12/16/06

They are indeed. And since it is a list of articles about color, I have reverted your change. Notinasnaid 11:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

About the 16 colors...

Shouldn't orange be one of the 16 colors? --James Maxx 10:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

But then it would be 17! Apparently not, see under the heading "CSS colors". Notinasnaid 11:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


Rainbow

Can any one make a rainbow? can they make a sig for me? the rain bow should be shades of blue. ♥Smartie960♥(Chatter Box) 22:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Now why would you want to do that?Pomte 00:06, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
How long did that take?! -PatPeter 20:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

ΜΜΜΜṬṬṬ colors are different types of light being bendedcertian ways , white is light being unbended. colors appear when light is bended a certian way.

Reason for 216 colours used in anti phishing routines

I'd dispute the "widest possible palette where all colours are distinguishable from each other" idea on three counts:

1/ isn't it more likely it's to have maximum compatibility even with very old computers/browsers or simple equipment? (there's probably still a few people out there using WebTVs or early pentiums/late 486s to do internet shopping/update their myspaces etc - they've still got enough power but rather basic video systems)

2/ as a long time computer user i remember using systems with 512 and 4096 colour palettes, and you could certainly tell the difference between all or at least >90% of those shades if your monitor was set right; there's good reason we're not still using 12-bit colour! (it's fairly obvious even with 15/16 bit colour in the right circumstances)

3/ viewing the 216 colour scale on a dim laptop screen, some of the closest shades (e.g. red F00 and very-slightly-pink F03) are very hard to tell apart and I'm not convinced I'd be able to read any text written in one colour on the other (though an AI routine would have no trouble), so it's not foolproof anyhow! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.46.180.56 (talk) 00:41, 14 May 2007 (UTC).

Gotta agree with you on this, no idea who wrote it. It seems like the worst anti=phishing ever >.< Hintswen  Talk | Contribs  02:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

256, 216, and 212 colors

Something should be said about 212 colors. Let me elaborate.

  • 256 is 28
  • 216 is 63 (allowing six bits per each of the three colors)
  • 212 is 216-4 (four colors which do not work with certain versions of MSIE)

Multiple sources have indicated that the 216 colors (which are handily six bits per color) were created to be compatible with Netscape 3 on both Macintosh and Windows and with MSIE on both Macintosh and Windows.

Not 6 bits per color (if it was, then yuu would have 26 colors, i.e. a palette of 64 colors only! but only 6 values (0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15) per color component. As there are 3 color components, this means that it will create 6×6×6 color shades, i.e. 6³.
Anyway, this color cube is badly distributed: red and green components are given the same importance as green, despite green is the most visible one and contributing the most to total brightness. And using the 6 arbitrary values that were defined using a linear progression is stupid: it creates too many dark colors, but not enough light colors (so the various "whites" are all very tinted, and this makes the image more sensitive to different viewing environments or different rendering technologies (the white point of display screens, generally expressed as a temperature in kelvins). This defect is recognized in "16-bit" image formats or colordepths for raster images where the "green" component uses the extra bit to reach 6 bits alone, and 5 bits for red or for blue.

However, when version 4 of MSIE came out, it didn't display four of the "web safe colors" correctly: #0033FF (0,51,255), #00FF33 (0,255,51), #3300FF (51,0,255), and #33FF00 (51,255,0). This is believed to affect versions 4.0 through 5.5.

fuchsia and MediumOrchid look exactly the same colour —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.19.76.180 (talk) 20:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Amethyst?

Why is Amethyst included in this list? It does not appear in CSS3 Colours or SVG Colours. Nor does it appear in the list of colours from X11 that MS added to IE3. Richard (talk) 22:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

You're right. And browsers don't support that colour name at all, as far as I've tested it. Strangely, "amethyst" has been listed in the article for more than two years. I've already removed it. Gelo71 (talk) 20:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

You guys are missing a color- Ice Blue. I'd add it myself, but I have no idea where it goes in the table. And plus I'm an anon. Tyedye0126 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.123.70.131 (talk) 17:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

No, that name doesn't exist in any standard specs as far as I know. I think the fact that you get a bluish colour in your message when you use the HTML tag <font color="IceBlue"> is simply due to some random colour assignment by the browser when it doesn't find a match for a colour name. For example, if you use <font color="ThisColorDoesNotExist">, you also get some coloured text. Gelo71 (talk) 21:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC).

Date of release of HTML and X11 colors inquiry

According to various Wikipedia articles I have read, it seems that the HTML color list and the X11 color list were both released at about the same time, that is, in the year 1987. Is that correct? If so, why was it deemed necessary to release two different color lists in the same year? Keraunos (talk) 11:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

They are not really two completely separate lists. The X11 color list was basically a configuration file (rgb.txt) for [X Window System] that mapped terms to RGB values for display. The current major version of X, X11 was released in September 1987. And the values in the list where from the reference implementation. It was not unusual for the various unix vendors that shipped X11 as part of there OS to tweak the numbers in color list slightly to account for differences in displays. I'm pretty sure Sun (Xsun) was one of the companies that made such a tweak. Since the original web browsers ran under X, they used the colors defined of the X server they ran on. With HTML 3.2 (January 1997), 16 colors matching the 16 colors of the Color Graphics Adapter palette (which was still in use with VGA) were added to the standard.[1] (Note the slight gamma shift for example #00AA00 vs #00800 for green and olive vs brown.) But the X11 names continued to be supported by most browsers. This is were the conflicts between the two list came into being. The colors were eventually standardized as part of the SVG standard (September 2001) and HTML/CSS3 (May 2003) [2]. BTW for research like this reading the wikipedia articles themselves is not enough, it's best to go back to the source materials. PaleAqua (talk) 21:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

When were the 16 HTML colors released for the very first time? Keraunos (talk) 10:50, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

As part of HTML? I believe that would have been HTML3.2 (January 1997) unless I missed something, but they were based on colors supported by older graphic cards as I said. Similar list where present in other standards, for example ANSI escape codes or the colors supported by Dec VT240 / VT340. It's been to long and I can't remember what Tektronix displays supported. The 16 colors though were fairly consistant since normally there would be 1 bit per red, green, and blue channels and then a bit used to alter the intensity. (Hence RGBI). Though often small hardware tweaks were made, such as replacing dark yellow (olive in html) with a brown. PaleAqua (talk) 17:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hex triplet

origin of hex triplet notation

The article should note that the hex triplet notation also comes from X11. 66.92.79.129 (talk) 00:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Full range?

The article says:

“An abbreviated, three (hexadecimal) digit form is sometimes used. Expanding this form to the six-digit form is as simple as doubling each digit: 09C becomes 0099CC. This allows each color value to cover its full range from 00 to FF.”

I am thinking this is misleading. It does not cover the full range, it covers only sixteen distinct values from 00 to FF: 00, 11, 22 and so on. Would somebody mind to express that fact more carefully? My English is not good enough. -- sarang사랑 16:34, 26 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarang (talkcontribs)

IMO 16×16×16 < 256×256×256 is clear enough. Here full range actually means 16 values in the full range from 0% to 100% (or something in this direction, presumably my DEnglish is worse ;-) –82.113.121.52 (talk) 18:06, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Citation tag removed

The article correctly states that some browsers don't accept CSS-syntax #rgb instead of HTML-syntax #rrggbb for pure HTML purposes, i.e., old bgcolor= and color= attributes still permitted in transitional (X)HTML. No citation is needed for this important fact, because the abbreviated CSS-syntax is simply not specified for (X)HTML color attributes, and in fact I know at least one browser where say #89A has not the same effect as #8899AA. The opposite statement some browsers accept CSS-syntax also outside of CSS would require citations, because that's not obvious. I've removed the incorrect {{fact}} tag. -82.113.121.52 (talk) 18:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

A suggsetion for the color list

Pink-peach. (#FF6666) It is a color that I use often. Is that able to be added? Plesae respond here or here, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4myself4 (talkcontribs)‎ 01:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge not needed?

As Web colors#HTML color names and HTML color names talk about the same, just with the same word, but few words, It's pointless to have two separated section/article.

I've found that a merge tag was already put. But it was commented out later, stating that "Canceled as irrelevant" (but it's not irrelevant at all, see above), "Canceled with prejudice" (I can not get the point in doing something " with prejudice" at all!) and "talk section never linked or started justifying reworking these pages" (I think that the merging need was self-evident, anyhow I've explained here now and if somebody want so we can talk about).

Later (while I was writing this here) I've seen by chance that my edit had been reverted "". I can not understand how they could be "", as there are some difference between them (There are some -little- things in HTML color names that are not in Web colors#HTML color names, and -if I can remember right- the other way round too) and they are two separated section/article. --79.40.133.176 (talk) 20:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

C'mon now - the table (which is about all there is) is identical, and there are a couple of other minor things that are mentioned elsewhere in the main article. If something has been missed, you can transfer the information. I was going to speedy delete as duplication, but I think a redirect works better. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:35, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

X11 color names

We need to be very careful with X11 color names. The article mentions the 'list of web "X11 colors" from the CSS3 specification'; but the CSS3 specification, which is found at http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/, has "X11" five times: once in the text; once as a reference within the text; once as the target for that reference; and twice in links to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X11_color_names

This could well be a violation of WP:CIRCULAR. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:13, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I think it is how you read the 'X11 color names' section. Noting it is a section of an article 'Web Colors', so the section 'X11 color names' is documenting the X11 in relation to Web, the thing that relates them is CSS, hence the list is the "X11 colors", ie in quotes, from the CSS spec. In other words the the list is the Web CSS list of colors which derived from X11. The CSS spec says "The table below provides a list of the X11 colors [X11COLORS] supported by popular browsers with the addition of gray/grey", emphasis on 'supported by', so it is CSS's list, not a definition of X11. So not circular. I think...

The article 'X11 color names' correctly defines them by reference to a X11 rgb.txt file which is the true (though unfortunately non-standardised ) source of names. Even the list there is not an accurate reflection of (a) rgb.txt file. ˥ Ǝ Ʉ H Ɔ I Ɯ (talk) 02:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

rgb.txt v's CSS3

While it is just a comparison of two lists it may be original research so I'll stick it here for comment as to weather it is proper or worth adding to the article.

A typical rgb.txt file http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/xc/programs/rgb/rgb.txt?rev=1.2&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup v's CSS3 colours http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/#svg-color

Apart from repeated colour variants, eg AntiqueWhite1..4, Grey1..99 the two lists are very similar.

Colour names in CSS not in RGB: Aqua, Crimson, Fuchsia, Indigo, Lime, Olive, Silver, Teal

Colour names in RGB not in CSS: LightGoldenrod, LightSlateBlue, NavyBlue, VioletRed

For posterity the decimal RGBs for the above are:
Aqua 0 255 255 = RGB Cyan & CSS Cyan
Crimson 220 20 60
Fuchsia 255 0 255 = RGB Magenta & CSS Magenta
Indigo 75 0 130
Lime 0 255 0 = RGB Green
Olive 128 128 0
Silver 192 192 192 (almost identical to Grey/Gray)
Teal 0 128 128
LightGoldenrod 238 221 130
LightSlateBlue 132 112 255
NavyBlue 0 0 128 = CSS Navy
VioletRed 208 32 144

the others do not have equivalents

The article already mentions "Note that this includes the common synonyms: aqua (HTML4/CSS 1.0 standard name) and cyan (common sRGB name), magenta (common sRGB name) and fuchsia (HTML4/CSS 1.0 standard name), gray (HTML4/CSS 1.0 standard name) and grey" which is the authors observation of the two references.

So is it OK to list in the article, perhaps a footnote to the table, the differences, or is that original research?˥ Ǝ Ʉ H Ɔ I Ɯ (talk) 02:53, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Rebeccapurple

I believe that the addition of rebeccapurple to the CSS color space is notable, especially as it has been mentioned by several new sources and is one on only two colors that CSS has added beyond the HTML/X11 base set. I do not believe that rebeccapurple needs it's on article, but we should list all 141 of the web colors on this page. Currently we only list 140 of them. PaleAqua (talk) 00:02, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

We need to be very careful when using W3C Editor's Drafts such as CSS Color Module Level 4 Editor’s Draft, 21 June 2014. They are a long way from being finalised, and some of them change quite often - perhaps every few days. Current W3C "standards" are those documents described as W3C Recommendation, such as CSS Color Module Level 3 W3C Recommendation 07 June 2011. Browser vendors that claim compliance with the latest standards should implement all the features of W3C Recommendation but are not obliged to provide anything that is only in a W3C Editor's Draft. The progress from W3C Editor's Draft to W3C Recommendation takes several years, and moves through several stages - W3C Editor's Draft → W3C Working Draft → W3C Candidate Recommendation → W3C Proposed Recommendation → W3C Recommendation, see lists at CSS Current Status. There is no set timetable for progression to the next stage, but stability tends to increase the further along it gets. Progression is not unidirectional, either: HTML 5 (which had moved from Working Draft to Candidate Recommendation on 17 December 2012) moved back from Candidate Recommendation to Working Draft on 17 June 2014 - just six days ago. At any stage, a document may become a W3C Working Group Note (formerly known as a W3C Note), which essentially means that all work has stopped and it will not be adopted as a standard. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
If it was just the editors draft I might agree but we also have third party reports and votes. This is a notable event given how few colors the working group has added to their color list. Perhaps it might be better to note the vote and describe the plan to include as you are right it is only in the draft so far. PaleAqua (talk) 14:23, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
BTW the current rgb.txt file ( which has not change in a long time ) has Orange listed and has a different set of missing colors than the ones here so we might need to fix that as well. The page on X11 colors even uses the HTML/CSS colors for its list instead of the X11 colors, such as listing the term as aqua instead of cyan. PaleAqua (talk) 14:27, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I have concerns about X11 colors. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:11, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Would not be the first time we had circular problems. I found another color list that got widely as a source used in the past was actually based off an old version of our list of colors article ( which I still don't think should be giving made up RBG values and apparently has now grown with some much OR that it got split in two ). I used to be more active on finding such issues, but have mostly given up. We had a lot of issues with sourcing on colors, and a lot of color articles where the implicit assumption is made that there is a one-to-one mapping between color terms and RBG coordinates. A lot of pages unfortunately treat the X11 color list, the CSS lists ( and similar list like the ones used for stamp collecting ) as defining the colors themselves, instead of just convenient mappings of terms to colors for particular systems. PaleAqua (talk) 15:38, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Grey vs. Gray

In this article, the names "gray" and "grey" are intermixed. "Grey" is typically British, and "gray" typically the American variant.

As seen at http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_colornames.asp, the HTML and CSS standards have the same color entries for both. This should be reflected in this article.

However, it is also worth noting that the page http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#color-units uses the spelling "gray" exclusively.

Klassica 19:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


It's also worth mentioning that style.color = 'grey' can cause a parse error on IE7 browsers - whether this is because IE is not standards-compliant or because 'gray' is the only one in the CSS21 standard is up for debate...


Shouldn't the "grey/gray" in X11 color names at least be consistent? Currently it lists LightGrey DarkGray

--Giddylake (talk) 16:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, IE 7 and older understand "lightgrey" for #D3D3D3 but reject "lightgray". Should this peculiarity be noted in the article? -- wr 79.224.125.105 (talk) 15:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Well the article says the list includes "gray (HTML4/CSS 1.0 standard name) and grey." but it doesn't. ˥ Ǝ Ʉ H Ɔ I Ɯ (talk) 00:37, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I just checked the two references and both spellings are included in both. I'm adding the missing ones. ˥ Ǝ Ʉ H Ɔ I Ɯ (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Both show correctly in late versions of Firefox and IE. ˥ Ǝ Ʉ H Ɔ I Ɯ (talk) 00:55, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

To whoever reverted my changes discussed above. I have reinstated them. As I stated the Grey versions are valid and exist in http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/types.html#ColorKeywords and http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/#svg-color

Further X11 includes grey spelling as an alternative, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X11_color_names and BTW w3 reference for X11 colours is to the wikipedia X11 color names page, all external links there also list both grey & gray. In summary W3 includes both grey & gray, W3 refer to the wikipedia X11 names, the X11 page lists both grey & gray, the Section Title is 'X11 color names' NOT somebody's view of what the names are. ˥ Ǝ Ʉ H Ɔ I Ɯ (talk) 00:11, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Please see my thread below regarding X11 color names. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Valid yes, but why use grey for just one instance, namely "lightgrey" and not for any of the others? Why the inconsistency? You already have a note that they can be both. Why not just make it "lightgray"... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.7.247 (talk) 01:56, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
In reply: If you look at the main X11 article, it says "Some browsers like Netscape Navigator insisted on an ‘a’ in any ‘Gray’ except for ‘Light Grey’.", so it is actually useful to show the difference, rather than just deciding for the 'look'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimarx (talkcontribs) 22:12, 10 September 2014‎

Still relevant? Preferred to refer to obsolete technology in lead?

"Web colors have an unambiguous colorimetric definition, sRGB, which relates the chromaticities of a particular phosphor set, a given transfer curve, adaptive whitepoint, and viewing conditions". "phosphor" (and other info?) there implies CRT monitor (only)? I assume the source mentiones "phosphor", and we can't replace the "phosphor" language with a language about LCD pixel technology (with no additional source) since it doesn't say anything about it? Still it applied to the three primary colors of CRTs but can we assume it translates exactly to newer technologies (LCD)? Maybe those are made to conform to the same exact standards (close enough).

Most monitors (and TVs) are no longer CRT (or plasma), at least in the west.., but this at least would be true of all mobile devices. Should we include a reference in the lead to an outdated technology (here or in general)? Which brings me to my last point, are web colors not relevant anymore? comp.arch (talk) 10:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)