3 ms·

Precisely this—while we only mention CIELAB in the post, we also tested other perceptually uniform color spaces in addition to Lab (and can switch between them

Precisely this—while we only mention CIELAB in the post, we also tested other perceptually uniform color spaces in addition to Lab (and can switch between them in the color tool). In particular, we also tested CIECAM02 extensively. We found that both were sufficient for the level of precision we needed and that Lab’s simpler lightness calculations are more closely aligned with how WCAG contrast ratios are calculated. We’re definitely open to testing other color spaces in the future as we continue to refine our color palettes.

jacobolus 7y ago
If you want something reasonably simple and fast to compute but which has been optimized to fit available experimental data better than CIELAB you could try https://observablehq.com/@jrus/jzazbz https://observablehq.com/@jrus/jzazbz
- notzuck 7y ago
  You're not smart.
  - jacobolus 7y ago
    What?
    - notzuck 7y ago
      Exactly what I said. You're just not smart. You're not really worth my time and I have nothing but contempt for the way you think.
      - jacobolus 7y ago
        Why do you feel the need to express this sentiment in a completely unrelated public discussion? (Are you an expert on human color vision or color reproduction technology or something?) Why should anyone reading this care whether you think I’m smart or not? Why should I care? I guess I should feel flattered to have earned your contempt. (Is your contempt a rare prize? Or do you feel contempt easily?) Sorry for all the questions, but this is a quite strange and amusing experience for me.
      - dang 7y ago
        Yikes. Posting like you did in this thread is a bannable offence on HN. I'm going to assume you didn't know you were breaking the site guidelines, but would you mind reviewing them and taking the spirit of this site to heart? Note the most important rule for comments: "Be kind." It doesn't vary based on how wrong (or how smart) the other person is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

jacobolus 7y ago

If you want something reasonably simple and fast to compute but which has been optimized to fit available experimental data better than CIELAB you could try https://observablehq.com/@jrus/jzazbz https://observablehq.com/@jrus/jzazbz

notzuck 7y ago
You're not smart.
- jacobolus 7y ago
  What?
  - notzuck 7y ago
    Exactly what I said. You're just not smart. You're not really worth my time and I have nothing but contempt for the way you think.
    - jacobolus 7y ago
      Why do you feel the need to express this sentiment in a completely unrelated public discussion? (Are you an expert on human color vision or color reproduction technology or something?) Why should anyone reading this care whether you think I’m smart or not? Why should I care? I guess I should feel flattered to have earned your contempt. (Is your contempt a rare prize? Or do you feel contempt easily?) Sorry for all the questions, but this is a quite strange and amusing experience for me.
    - dang 7y ago
      Yikes. Posting like you did in this thread is a bannable offence on HN. I'm going to assume you didn't know you were breaking the site guidelines, but would you mind reviewing them and taking the spirit of this site to heart? Note the most important rule for comments: "Be kind." It doesn't vary based on how wrong (or how smart) the other person is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html