Warp schrieb:
>   The quotes allow putting there more than just a hex value prepended
> with a #. You can put color names and everything else HTML supports,
> plus more.

Rather not. I'd pretty much consider that overkill. Unless you want to 
extend POV-Ray's capabilities to rendering HTML documents of course...

>> A hash sign (#) followed by six uppercase(!) hex digits could denote a 
>> HTML color.
> 
>   "HTML color" can be more than just hex values. By making it a non-string
> you are removing the possibility of other color definitions being used
> (such as named colors).

... which is what I'd prefer to do, actually: Straightforward 24-bit 
colors should suffice. So rather than specifying a generic way how to 
specify HTML colors, I'd rather specify that "a hash sign followed by 
six uppercase hex digits is interpreted as a HTML color".

If you want color names, go ahead and define them as genuine POV-Ray 
variables in some .ini file.

> having a # followed by something exceptional is only going to cause severe
> problems, besides being awkard, rigid and limited.

I don't see any severe problems, nor do I consider it awkward, and the 
rigidity and limitations is something I see as a benefit, because it 
will stop users from complaining that some particular HTML color syntax 
they happen to have tried hasn't been implemented yet. Or someone 
complaining 7 years later that POV-Ray crashes when using 30-digit hex 
color. Or someone complaining 7 years later that POV-Ray hasn't been 
updated to support some new HTML 8.0 colors syntax. Or the new color 
names introduced with HTML 7.0.

Supporting only a very limited, rigid subset of HTML color syntax would 
perfectly avoid this can of worms.

But given what fuss people seem capable of making about this, maybe the 
best idea would be to not support any HTML-style color syntax in the 
first place, and stick to POV-Ray's traditional way of specifying colors.

Post a reply to this message