Re[2]: Fwd: re: [cgmo-webcgm] New draft snapshot

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 01:17 PM 7/13/2004 -0400, Benoit Bezaire wrote:
>Hi Lofton,
>
>You said: Don wrote in his proposal, "Then the desired Relative
>Intensity replaces the luminance component in calculated HLS".  That
>does not seem ambiguous -- it corresponds to the 2nd interpretation.
>
>But I still think it is ambiguous, see Don's (private) reply to me.
>He went for the 1st interpretation.

In which case, "replaces" really should be something like "is multiplied 
by" (assuming fractional-valued [0,1]) in the original wording...

>To apply Relative Intensity to a color attribute, the RGB value of that 
>attribute must be converted to HLS. Then the desired Relative Intensity 
>replaces the luminance component in calculated HLS...

FWIW, I don't feel strongly about how it's done, as long as it's well defined.

-Lofton.