Message158893
Terry: sorry, I missed this before.
Re 1. Sure, this seems reasonable, if there's a real sense in which the new numbers are better than the old. Besides MATLAB, there's also a set of numbers given on Wikipedia that might be considered. I don't have the domain knowledge to know what's sensible here.
I *would* rather see the inverse transformation keep the full 6 digits of precision, though. Or perhaps even give the inverse to full float precision. Without that, the result of roundtripping RGB -> YIQ -> RGB could be significantly (perhaps even visibly) different from the original. I don't think it's acceptable for the roundtrip error to increase significantly w.r.t. Python 3.2.
Re 2. For this issue, I don't see a real benefit to adding the tests to the maintenance releases. No strong opinions, though. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2012-04-20 21:24:47 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients:
+ mark.dickinson, terry.reedy, packetslave |
2012-04-20 21:24:47 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1334957087.02.0.695087080429.issue14323@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2012-04-20 21:24:46 | mark.dickinson | link | issue14323 messages |
2012-04-20 21:24:46 | mark.dickinson | create | |
|