4 ms·

You actually thought of that and then also wrote it down. You had to intentionally press "reply" to make the internet see this message. I am stunned!

• userbinator 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • shiomiru 2y ago
    You look at the monstrosity that is the CSS spec(s), filled to the brim with horrible ideas like floats, the various overcomplicated positioning modes that no mortal can hope to ever fully understand, and undefined behavior left and right in general. And the "bloat" you end up singling out is... an addition to the otherwise 147 entries long color name table.[0] That's just bizarre. [0]: at least when I was implementing it: https://git.sr.ht/~bptato/chawan/tree/351f2f51322c2fa291772c46b06d1a0af2cd26f7/item/src/types/color.nim#L118 https://git.sr.ht/~bptato/chawan/tree/351f2f51322c2fa291772c... perhaps there's more now...
    • johnisgood 2y ago
      Your list includes all 140 CSS named colors, so as per CSS Color Module Level 3, it is exhaustive. Your list has duplicates which are valid because both American and British spellings are recognized, e.g. "darkgray" and "darkgrey". If it is not limited to CSS, then you are missing X11 colors (around ~256), for example, although some overlap with CSS colors. If interested, Gpick can serve as a starting point.
  • moomoo11 2y ago
    What’s ur browser called?