Talk:X11 color names

message: Some of these are the same color but the names are not. Whose problem is this?? 66.245.78.149 20:23, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just checked the rgb.txt file on my PC (running XOrg 6.7.0) and it's that way in the original file. (The original file is in numerical order of colour triplets, so it's really obvious.) I'll add a note to the article - David Gerard 12:21, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Duplicated colors

message: The copies of rgb.txt I have access to (XFree86 4.3.0, Xorg 6.8.1, the X server shipped with Solaris) don't contain an entry for indigo.  What is the source of the indigo entry?
:Same for copies of rgb.txt I have access to: Xorg 6.8.2, XFree86 4.2.1, XFree86 4.1.0, and also Emacs 21.4 and 21.2 (for Cygwin). http://vancouver-webpages.com/DIY/color.html mentions that Netscape and WebTV, but not rgb.txt, have indigo; but that's all the info I could find online about it (other than pages including it in a list of X11 color names). --Mairi 06:29, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This authorative page  lists 140, the WP article has seven more, all of which are gray/grey variants. I am therefore removing the disputed tag, which in any case should have been inserted in the article only after failure to reach a concensus here. Viajero | Talk 17:49, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  is not an authoritative page for this article. As the article states, that is “a list of the X11 colors [X11COLORS] supported by popular browsers” (my emphasis added). Thus, that page only purports to be a subset of the X11 colors. The subset nature is more obvious if one follows the link to which the w3c page refers to as the authority of that list. --Jaybeeunix 17:07, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indigo? and Other Added Colors

message: Are these gamma corrected?  Do they assume they will be displayed on a standard 2.5 gamma CRT or LCD?  Otherwise, the values need to go through gamma correction to see the real result (see http://xona.com/colorlist for an example of how FAR off the mark colors can be without proper gamma correction).  Also, you can't assume the browser programmers to have thought of this.  The standard 6x6x6 = 216 colors 'web safe colors' are an example of where they just don't 'get' gamma correction: Web_colors.137.186.22.189 20:44, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this article is about X11 I think it should be noted that the individual X servers (basically the display) have an option to specify one’s gamma correction for his/her hardware. For example, see the -gamma, -rgamma, -ggamma, and -bgamma options in XFree86-like servers. --Jaybeeunix 18:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If the orginal list was given in sRGB and the user has calibrated his monitor properly, then using the original RGB values should yield the result we want. Shinobu 03:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The original X11 colors were based on whatever gamma correction and primary colors were provided on the particular workstation. These varied dramatically from one machine to another. CSS colors are now specified to be sRGB. -jacobolus (t) 22:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Gamma Correction

message: I've made the following changes to the table:
# Removed background color from all text cells so everyone can read the text, regardless of gamma/monitor settings, etc.; only Sample column now shows the colors.
# Used hex to specify color in "style" attribute (figured this would be the most widely supported, although any browser that knows "style" should be able to handle all three ways of specifying color — another reason I removed color from the other 2 columns). If you know that some browsers/OSs will show different colors depending on how they are specified (name/hex/rgb), please discuss here.
# Removed a lot of the formatting (font size, text alignment); made color-name cells regular cells rather than header cells; changed "monospace" style to  tags (better browser support, I assume).
# Linked "Hex" and "RGB" in header (oh, and removed "#" from hex values in that column).
I hope there aren't any major objections; this article has just bugged me for a long time, so I decided to finally do something about it. - dcljr (talk) 00:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the table format to match List of colors.  I think the table looks much nicer with RGB values in seperate columns.  However, I also reintroduced bold names, #-prefixes, and some right-aligned text.  I did this mostly for consistency, rather than personal preference.  If you strongly disagree with these changes, the #-prefixes and bold names are easily removed with find-and-replace.  But please consider keeping the RGB values right-aligned.  They're prettier that way.  —Ryanrs 13:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not sure why that would be, but whatever. That's fine. Still looks a lot better than before my last edit. - dcljr (talk) 06:39, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Wonderful work all the way around, but the list was more useful to me when the groupings were by color; e.g., I want to look through the reds, or the greens, or whatever.  The Turkish translation still has this arrangement, and I hope it gets kept.  For the English language, I think it's fine to leave what's here as-is, and add another table that's grouped by appearance.  Marc W. Abel 22:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I completely agree - wonderful work on the simplified table format - thanks dclrj! Marc - maybe the table grouping by color could be made into it's own page. I would also find that useful. Then you could link that article to this page. --Unixguy 11:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Marc - for the table grouped by color, see the Web Colors article. --Unixguy
I would recommend moving hex into a single column: the only reason to have hex there is for copy/paste into contexts where a hex designation is needed; otherwise it’s completely redundant with the decimal representation. Hex should either be scrapped as redundant, or else it should be put into one column where it can be usefully copy/pasted. –jacobolus (t) 23:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table simplification 

message: According to Khaki_(color)#Web_color_light_khaki, web kaki is #C3B091 and X11 khaki is #F0E68C. Quote>
--burga (talk) 21:13, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That article was wrong, I corrected it. — Christoph Päper 17:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Khaki 

message: Shouldn't the hex (and by extension the numeric value) of gray be listed as 0x808080 for the HTML comparison?  Same goes for green, etc.  7F should be 80, right?--61.194.119.130 (talk) 05:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  HTML Gray and others are mistaken 

message: The numeric values for colors mentioned in the text of the article are currently displayed in the color they describe. Should they be? This doesn't strike me as something that should occur in the main text of an encyclopedia article, and it certainly doesn't help readability. —71.196.83.53 (talk) 08:24, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article now uses  instead of  in prose. — Christoph Päper 12:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coloring of color values 

message: Disregard my original comment. I see that "LightGoldenrodYellow" has been shortened to be "LightGoldenrod" in the table, and "LaserLemon" has been added to the table. Why? LaserLemon is not listed in the CSS level 3 spec. Sprokofiev (talk) 01:41, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  LaserLemon vs LightGoldenrodYellow  

message: I removed the the following, as WhiteSmoke (Virus) is now a redlink. 
 
Tony Mach (talk) 21:36, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You left it in a comment. I removed that, too. — Christoph Päper 11:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, OK! Tony Mach (talk) 12:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed the WhiteSmoke redirect 

message: The circle is almost complete X11 -> SVG + HTML colors -> CSS -> X11. Though the server no longer uses the rgb.txt file, but uses a builtin hardcoded database instead which hasn't yet been updated. Sounds like this will happen after 1.16. PaleAqua (talk) 03:39, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full Circle 

message: So who is abridging and rationalising? And hence isn't that self publishing and a POV?
The article is X11 not W3C, so shouldn't the list BE THE LIST, THE X11 list. W3C references should be in w3C articles.
If someone want a list of X11 colours supported by browsers, put that list in an article re browser colour support.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimarx (talk • contribs) 06:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: — Christoph Päper 10:40, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  abridged and rationalized 

message: |}
I wanted to include a sample table for the numbered variants (and did), when I discovered that with  you can clearly see that they are the result of value or brightness variation in HSV/HSB notation in a constant manner. Hues are sometimes slightly off, though. I didn’t want to include another  table, though, because these templates are expensive and the page is already loading slowly.
Has this been documented somewhere so we could reference that and rewrite the section? — Christoph Päper 10:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: See my links in the full circle section above which has links to the source definition files. The current version of X11 has them in rgb.txt at , though these days they are built into the server as seen at . PaleAqua (talk) 02:27, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was asking for a reference (i.e. reliable source) for the brightness values of color variants. The source code is quiet on that. — Christoph Päper 10:11, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  The variants got added by Paul Raveling . See also the README which talks about the 4 variants and raveling.txt which got merged into RGB text. PaleAqua (talk) 21:29, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, I see, thanks. It seems, though, that not all of raveling.txt made it into rgb.txt. — Christoph Päper 15:22, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, and the variants got removed ( for performance reasons ) and later readded at the end. Also, some of the base colors got changed ( often somewhere between thomas.txt and raveling.txt ) wthout the variants being updated. I believe variants follow a highest RGB coordinate being 255, 238, 205, and then 139 from 1 to 4 and the rest of the RGB coordinates scaled relatively to the highest. PaleAqua (talk) 19:53, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbered variants 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on X11 color names. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080502201401/http://cvsweb.xfree86.org:80/cvsweb/*checkout*/xc/programs/rgb/rgb.txt?rev=1.1 to http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/*checkout*/xc/programs/rgb/rgb.txt?rev=1.1
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070928030522/http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/xc/programs/rgb/rgb.txt.diff?r1=1.2&r2=1.1 to http://cvsweb.xfree86.org/cvsweb/xc/programs/rgb/rgb.txt.diff?r1=1.2&r2=1.1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why isn't the hazelnut colour in this article?
https://color.adobe.com/hazelnut-latte-color-theme-688428/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krotzpyn (talk • contribs) 19:13, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it's not in rgb.txt and hence not an X11 colour name. This article is about the X11 colour names, not colour names per se. -- HarJIT (talk) 08:25, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  And «hazelnut colour»? 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Dark Grey and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 14#Dark Grey until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Q28 (talk) 05:30, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dark Grey" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The link to modern rgb.txt is not valid. Freedesktop project has moved to Gitlab 2A01:112F:430C:E00:7035:808E:3F3E:24FB (talk) 13:28, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Gitgub is dead 

message: Orange      #FFA500
Orange Red  #FF4500
show the same RGB value so one must be wrong. Perhaps someone could check all of the displayed RGB values against an installed rgb.txt file. Thanks for your efforts :o). GeneThomas2 (talk) 21:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Whilst the R and B components are the same, the G components are different - A5 and 45 respectively. In which section do you see the same values for the two? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:25, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake. GeneThomas2 (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake: Orange and  Orange Red RGB Values