Accessibility standards cover this area pretty thoroughly. http://governor.state.tx.us/disabilities/accessibledocs/ has some information that might be bent to emacs-orgmode's purposes.
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013, Eric S Fraga wrote: > Bastien <b...@gnu.org> writes: > > > Eric S Fraga <e.fr...@ucl.ac.uk> writes: > > > >> And I've not only given up trying to convert anybody to Emacs, I have > >> also given up trying to explain why a dark background with light text is > >> much better on the eyes. Too much inertia and bad practices out there > >> unfortunately. > > > > On this slightly off-topic subject, an oculist told me the dark > > background did not really matter, what matters is the contrast. > > Very high and very low are not good, something inbetween (but > > he could point to a way to quantify this.) > > It is indeed all about contrast and the problem is that, in many > environments, the lighting of the environment is significantly lower > brightness than a white background screen. YMMV, of course ;-) > > Note that this is for emitting devices as opposed to reflective > surfaces, such as paper and e-readers, where black on white is better. > > Personally, I have problems with my eyes unfortunately and I do need to > configure systems so that I don't end up with headaches every day. > > Off-topic but a very important selling point for Emacs, IMO. It is so > easy to change colour themes and have results that look good in > seconds. Contrast this with most other software where it is just plain > difficult if not impossible to configure the colours as one would > like. And org mode works very well with most of the colour themes I > have tried. > > Anyway, back to normal programming on this channel! :-) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- jude <jdash...@shellworld.net> Microsoft, windows is accessible. why do blind people need screen readers?
