[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: okteta text color
From:       Matthew Woehlke <mw_triad () users ! sourceforge ! net>
Date:       2008-04-30 1:46:47
Message-ID: fv8j28$5oq$1 () ger ! gmane ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Luciano Montanaro wrote:
> On Monday 28 April 2008 09:44:47 Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
>> Hi Carlo,
>>
>> thanks for the report.
>> Still, please try to use bugs.kde.org to make sure I really see your
>> reports :)
>>
>> Am Montag, 28. April 2008, um 01:29 Uhr, schrieb Carlo:
>>> Hi,
>>> I've just tried okteta and since I use a dark color scheme(obsidian
>>> coast) the text is unreadable
>>> http://uploadgeek.nl/files/gqh2c7tdl228qb8rrtdx.png
>>> so I think that either the background color should be forced to be
>>> white, or the text should use colors from the actual colorscheme
>> Two (or such) colors are still hardcoded, as there are no entries in the
>> colorscheme with proper semantics. On my Todo list for too long, true, will
>> hopefully soon be tackled.
>>
>> Forcing the backround to white is a good idea, will fallback to that if I
>> miss to fix the coloring in time for the 4.1 release.
> 
> I don't think so -- no color should be hardcoded.
> Can't you reuse some other color role, for now?

What Luciano said ;-), both about forcing a color (don't do that!) and 
using some color roles.

The names of the color roles are really meant to be *suggestions*, not 
rules. That is, if you need a color that fits into one of the suggested 
roles, you should use the appropriate color for consistency. Otherwise, 
if you just need "colors", you're pretty much free to pick whatever 
makes the most sense, or even what seems most aesthetically pleasing in 
most instances (see for example how kwrite uses the color roles).

Those that followed Olaf's original proposal will know this, but 
originally the roles didn't even have names, just 'extra roles 1-7'. The 
names are a matter of looking nicer and suggesting common use cases for 
consistency, *not* usage requirements.

Maybe I need to try to make this more explicit in the documentation?

Friedrich: If you can tell me the meaning of the colors currently used, 
I can offer suggestions. It looks like you have normal text (um, 
NormalText??), non-printable text, and text being edited. For 
non-printable, there is InactiveText, or if you don't like that look, 
NeutralText. For text being edited, ActiveText would be most strictly 
appropriate, though some feel that tends to be suboptimal in many color 
schemes (it is, really, but that has a lot to do with that being the 
hardest color to assign in my experience, and I would welcome 
suggestions for improvement of the shipped schemes). You might also use 
PositiveText for editing, and either color could use any combination of 
LinkText and VisitedText (unless okteta actually has clickable links, 
that is).

-- 
Matthew
Yesterday, I thought of the best .sig that has ever been contemplated. 
Alas, I forgot it before I could write it down.

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]