The "Dark Gray" in the Halo picker is very Dark Gray. The Dark Gray web standard isn't. So, I suppose you could "fix" it, but you'd be making it less sensible and may as well just go with Gray if you must (which would still be significantly lighter than what's in the picker right now.)Azhrei wrote:Are you saying that the two are different? I've never noticed.
I thought I had added a single ColorNames table somewhere and had changed all the references to use that table. (You caught one mistake with Grean => Lime.) So if Dark Gray doesn't mean the same thing in both places, it should and that's a bug to be fixed.
Edit: FYI, what's in the halo picker right now is 82% Gray, whereas the html Dark Gray is about 40% Gray.
Spoken like a true code monkey.However, it makes sense that the HTML frames use the same color set as the W3C standards. And it makes very little sense for the macro buttons themselves (which, incidentally, are colored by using HTML attributes) to use a different set.
But I'm going to disagree. Programatically you're right. But from a UI standpoint it makes very little sense for a typical user to assume that "Dark Gray" would be lighter than "Gray" when they are picking colors for buttons from a text drop down (unless they are familiar with the anomaly in the web standards... an unfriendly assumption, imo.) And even if you put in a color picker with a text name overlay (as in the halos), you're going to end up with a lot of users going, "Looks like they switched up Dark Gray with Gray."
I expect MT's macro script to adhere to the webstandards when using html color codes, I don't expect an interface like that to do so.
If you can't bring yourself to have it make sense from a layman's perspective why not do what many graphical programs do and call the grays something like "25% Gray", "50% Gray", and "75% Gray." That would be more accurately descriptive for more users.