On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 12:25:18 +0200 Juergen Stuber <juer...@jstuber.net> wrote: > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 12:05:20 +0200 > Martin Pitt <mp...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > As a daytime worker I also use a white background, but the colors > > (black, green, and red) are readable very well on it. > > I use a light gray background, so green becomes completely unreadable.
I just checked it on a white background, and I don't find it particularly usable either. I do like that it uses colors by default, but I'd suggest either: 1) Setting the background color (http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/color applies as much here as it does on the web). On the other hand, that advice also applies equally well to setting terminal colors; Juergen, you might consider setting your terminal's entire palette to a set of colors such that the ones typically used for foreground highlighting contrast with your background color. 2) Finding some way to automatically detect the background color and choose a suitable color scheme accordingly. Personally, I've wished for quite some time that vim would do this rather than requiring "set bg=light" or "set bg=dark". It's possible to retrieve the color palette (and in particular, the current text background color) using xterm control sequences. Perhaps this could become a common helper function. > Apart from that I generally dislike colors yelling at me, so I prefer > them off. For accessibility reasons all important information should > anyway be communicated in some other way. The colors don't indicate anything the text doesn't already say; green corresponds to the "active (running)" description. I agree that we should never communicate important information *only* by color, and that the color schemes should aim for maximum usability, but I do think it's reasonable to use color for highlights/emphasis/etc by default. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
