Re 1.: I think it's ok to close the window. Even if we keep it, I'd find "accept" better than "copy".

Re 2.: The window opens very slowly. I would definitely prefer it to come with the colors precalculated. I remember the size was something like 100k, which is not that much at all, especially since it just has to be fetched once.

Re 3.: That would be great, but it's not a must-have IMO.

Re 4.: It doesn't work with Mozilla right now, because it doesn't generate hex colors but somthing like "gb(255,221,85)" instead, but I guess you know that already.

• I am missing a good preview area right now. Currently, there's only a slim border where the preview color is displayed. I always find myself increasing the window width to see a decent preview area.
• It would be nice to have the name of the color you're selecting displayed somewhere, e.g. "Background color", "Small text color", "Active Link color" etc
• On Mozilla the selected color sqares are not highlightet, but I guess that's just the missing marquee pics? Anyway, just thought I'd mention it because on IE there is some kind of highlighting.

When it works (i.e. on I.E) it's very nice!

it's really incredible how slow the colorpicker opens in mozilla browsers... about 10 times slower than on ie – well, that's faster than the display of a page's source code (at least sometimes)! but i don't want to put a word too good for m$.

so i surely will put in the pre-calculated color array, again.

and concerning the rgb(r,g,b) values: did not work in mozilla because i always trimmed the first character from the color string. how should i know that there are color values not beginning with a hash? :)

however, it works now with rgb values, too. just remains the question if they are very ugly as readable values... (if they are, i'd have to use some more lines of code).

hannes, will it be enough to increas the size of the window to get a larger preview area?

the target's name of the current color pick i will add to the output. and i think i will remove the color value display (or does anyone really need it?)

if the marquee image is installed properly (which is really a task because it needs an antville db patch), it should also highlight the chosen color in mozilla. at least that's how it is in my 0.9 version (and netscape 6.2, too).

I don't find Mozilla so much slower than IE 6 - maybe you should upgrade to 1.x.

Yes, increasing the size of the window would do the trick for me. I'd add another 50% of the current width to the right, but of course that's a matter of taste.

The image needs a database upgrade? How's that?

the image is created by a macro just like e.g. the invisible pixel image.

ad mozilla: yeah, i should do an upgrade. btw. do you know which mozilla version corresponds to netscape 6.2?

Re: image: of course. I thought of something more complex when I read "db patch".

Netscape 6.2 is Mozilla 0.9.4, AFAIK, i.e. very ancient. I recommend going directly to 1.1 beta.

ad image: uh, i am so lazy. i should have typed "the macro needs an db entry for the marquee tag in the av_image table". so a db patch is in fact needed (antville_dbpatch20020801.sql).

doesn't work for me on Mozilla 1.0/1.1. Just displays a white page with a light gray rectangle where the colors should be.

there was another trouble with the hashes in color values... should be fixed now.