On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 05:41:04AM -0400, Thomas Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 02:00:13AM +0200, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > A reasonable alternate choice (still improving contrast for blue/black)
> > might
> > for instance be blue2, which is a little brighter (0xee) than the value
> > used by
> > pterm. On the other hand, it might not display well with a blue/white
> > combination on a low-quality display (I recall some issues about that).
>
> I note also:
> black text on blue2 background is unreadable.
> Dodger blue is readable.
That is a very uncommon combination (I have not seen that used, and
after all, xterm has high-intensity colours, so it would be asking for
unreadable colours when you use two low-intensity colours together).
You will always find colour combimations that are unreadable. The point
of changing (or better: not canging colours) with respect to other
terminals is not to introduce more or different combinations that are
hard to read.
The vt100 colours look very similar everywhere, so programs had ample time
to find combinations that work, as opposed to ones that do not work.
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
