That ought to end well. "It enhances understanding! We benefit from a nomenclature..."
... that is apparently entirely reliant on case-sensitivity. Because "I'm Blue" is a very different color to "I'M BLuE" (and I guarantee there's probably dozens of other variations there, at least).
If it's 3 non-repeating unordered words, the minimum vocabulary will need to be 256*3 = 768. Realistically you'll need an order of magnitude larger. That's a pretty large vocabulary.
It is a minor point, but 467 words would suffice, as there are 16865705 possibilities to choose 3 elements out of 467. (This is the smallest possible.)
Strictly speaking, yes, if you just view it as unordered sampling without replacement. Although that would squeeze out nearly all of the creative side of things.
I suspect you didn't catch gp's meaning: To get to 24 bits of color info, you'd need at least 3 words of 8 bit info each. If you want these to be non-repeating and unordered that makes 256x3=768 unique words.
I'm just jumping in where I saw a misunderstanding :) I think that's what they mean by unordered as that makes sense with the numbers (I think).
To some degree I agree, but there are also a lot of cases where different orders aren't distinguishable easily. "Light bright red" and "bright light red" is the best I can come up with quickly but I'm sure you get the idea.
