krtisfranks wrote:
> I think that the definition of this word should actually be reflective of

> "tone", "tint", and "shade" (which are greyness/black-joi-white-ness,
> whiteness, and blackness of a color, respectively) rather than hue (which

> is redness, greenness, blueness, and sometimes: yellowness, orangeness,
and
> violetness; I would also argue for indigoness (which is actually the
light
> blue in a rainbow, whereas "blue" is the dark blue) and a generalized "a
> culturally identified and distinct color in a rainbow/spectrum"-ness).
>
> This is due to the fact that "tinto" is a lot like the English word for
> "tint" phonologically, so it should match it semantically, if we want to
> avoid unnecessary confusion.
>
> I would also have preferred to go with "tinte".
>
> I propose the "hue" (as described before) becomes some
> gismu-generation-algorithm-generated gismu derived from English "cu" (for

> "hue", although "ton" from "tone" also works), Spanish "ton" (from
"tono"),
> Russian "ton" (from the same), and whatsoever it is in Chinese, Hindi,
and
> Arabic.

We should also beware the difference between "chromacity" and
"chrominance".

We might want to eventually create a word (maybe lujvo) for "gamut"
(roughly: a span of/generated by color parameters).