Update of bug #64720 (project groff):

                  Status:                    None => Invalid                
             Assigned to:                    None => gbranden               
             Open/Closed:                    Open => Closed                 

    _______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comment #2:

I agree with Dave.  These selection of a color scheme with sufficient contrast
is the job of the document or the rendering environment (for example, a
terminal emulator).

The rendering environment can include the device, but it seems you're
complaining about the terminal device specifically.  _groff_ supports only
ANSI X3.64/ECMA-48/ISO 6429 color names for terminals, of which there are are
eight, and _none_ of which have a prescribed value in any color space.

If the contrast of some of _groff_'s predefined color names is poor on some
other _groff_ output device, like PostScript or PDF, then that _might_ be an
issue worth reporting against the output driver's tmac file, such as
[https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/tmac/ps.tmac?h=1.23.0#n137
ps.tmac].  On the other hand, contrast between some colors is always going to
be low or nonexistent, so please don't leap to report one without giving the
issue consideration first.

For example, I would expect the contrast between "slategray1" and "slategray2"
to be low anywhere.

The question of X11's blue color as a foregound on a black background has
[https://invisible-island.net/xterm/xterm.faq.html#dont_like_blue something of
a history], with which I am familiar.  For a long time, Debian's xterm package
used "DodgerBlue" as its "ANSI" blue color.  After I stopped maintaining xterm
for Debian, that decision got reverted, a poor usability decision.

I recommend use of "DodgerBlue" as blue to all users of terminal emulators
with dark backgrounds.


$ grep -i dodger ~/.Xresources 
XTerm.*.VT100.Color4: dodgerBlue1
UXTerm.*.VT100.Color4: dodgerBlue1


Resolving as invalid.  This matter is beyond the scope of things _groff_ can
control.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?64720>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/


Reply via email to