Yeah but so is cyan, which is arguably more accurate of a name for the 100% blue/green combo that you're talking about. What I'm saying is why are you using an

Yeah but so is cyan, which is arguably more accurate of a name for the 100% blue/green combo that you're talking about. What I'm saying is why are you using an arbitrary specification to make decisions based on individual perception? I could say 0,255,255 is aqua but that doesn't really mean anything beyond digital color space, so why even use that as a metric for how green or blue something is beyond a perfectly color-accurate digital display using RGB as a colorspace? "Blue green" in plain English is not solely the 0,255,255 "blue green" that is in RGB space, it's like you narrowed it down to just that and ignored everything else