On Mon, 15 Sep 1997, Riku Saikkonen wrote:
Been watching this thread for a while now ... I feel now I may want to
step in and just give some input. After being in web devlopment for last
4 or so years.
> Sue Campbell wrote:
> >As the webmaster, I probably should have stepped in earlier on this
>
Sue Campbell wrote:
>As the webmaster, I probably should have stepped in earlier on this
>discussion. As was stated earlier, this was discussed a while ago
>and the majority asked for white. Just so there is no accusations
>of bias, I'll mention that I find the pure white background distracting.
H
Hi,
I am hesitant about stirring up this particular pile of worms
again, but the last time around, I advocated putting the background
colour in style sheets, so people have a little more leeway in over
riding it.
But I don't think strongly enough about it to champion the
style
On Mon, 15 Sep 1997, Sue Campbell wrote:
> As the webmaster, I probably should have stepped in earlier on this
> discussion. As was stated earlier, this was discussed a while ago
> and the majority asked for white. Just so there is no accusations
> of bias, I'll mention that I find the pure white
From: Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As for the iris opening wider -- I suspect that the overall lighting
> of the room you're in has a greater effect than the coloring of the
> page; that would seem to be why my vision specialist recommended a
> brightly lit room, *not* just a local bright ligh
On Sun, Sep 14, 1997 at 06:05:47PM -0400, Mark Eichin wrote:
>
> > high contrast. That's why books are printed on white paper and not
>
> (1) Paper Doesn't *GLOW*
Second!
> (2) spurious argument (the history has *nothing* to do with contrast:
> black ink has less variation than white; printing
As the webmaster, I probably should have stepped in earlier on this
discussion. As was stated earlier, this was discussed a while ago
and the majority asked for white. Just so there is no accusations
of bias, I'll mention that I find the pure white background distracting.
I would ask that people d
Ah, I forgot about the rod/cone resolution difference.
As for the iris opening wider -- I suspect that the overall lighting
of the room you're in has a greater effect than the coloring of the
page; that would seem to be why my vision specialist recommended a
brightly lit room, *not* just a local
I too am willing to trust the judgement of the web team in picking the
background and other esthetic issues.
As an academic point, black type on a white background is the highest contrast
you can arrive at for the _luminance_ sensing cells of the eye, which have at
least two times the resolution o
> high contrast. That's why books are printed on white paper and not
(1) Paper Doesn't *GLOW*
(2) spurious argument (the history has *nothing* to do with contrast:
black ink has less variation than white; printing white on black paper
would be hard by comparison, and it isn't really known if it
I find that there is a tremendous amount a glare produced on my terminal
screen with a pure white background. I am HTML ignorant, but the
offending command usually looks like this:
in, e.g., http://www.debian.org and other assorted Debian info pages.
The Netscape default, i.e., with BGCOLO
This was flamed about once before; you might check the logs for the
comments from back then. (I'm fortunate that the two browsers I do use
let me ignore all color specs in html, for pure white tends to flicker
much more, which I find highly annoying.)
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-m
Jeff Sheinberg wrote:
> I find that there is a tremendous amount a glare produced on my terminal
> screen with a pure white background.
Well, I disagree with the changing the colour to grey. I like white.
Most people have a decent monitor, and the white background looks very nice.
Leaving the b
Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This was flamed about once before; you might check the logs for the
> comments from back then. (I'm fortunate that the two browsers I do use
> let me ignore all color specs in html, for pure white tends to flicker
> much more, which I find highly annoying.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeff Sheinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Netscape default, i.e., with BGCOLOR omitted, produces a nice, easy
> on the eyes grey.
This is not what the research has shown -- readability is produced by
high contrast. That's why books are printed on white paper
On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Sue Campbell wrote:
> > I'm planning to set up a "Debian Project Manual" which contains a chapter
> > about the "History of Debian". So in case someone is working on this topic
> > it would be good to coordinate our efforts. We could use the same text for
> > that manual and t
> I'm planning to set up a "Debian Project Manual" which contains a chapter
> about the "History of Debian". So in case someone is working on this topic
> it would be good to coordinate our efforts. We could use the same text for
> that manual and the web page.
>
Good idea. I'll certainly use it w
On Wed, 10 Sep 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
> Here's some feedback/corrections:
>
> about.html:
>
> * Ian Murdock started Debian. Ian Jackson wrote dpkg + the bug system.
> (Suggetion: get Ian #1 to write a little history blurb)
I'm planning to set up a "Debian Project Manual" which contains a
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> why_debian.html:
I think there are at least three different groups of OSes that people
might choose instead of Debian:
1. Other Linux distributions, like Red Hat.
2. Other Unixes, like FreeBSD or Solaris.
3. Windows
Here's some feedback/corrections:
about.html:
* Ian Murdock started Debian. Ian Jackson wrote dpkg + the bug system.
(Suggetion: get Ian #1 to write a little history blurb)
* I would link to www.kernel.org for the kernel information (that's
Linus's web site). Wired had a nice artic
Sue Campbell wrote:
> I'd appreciate comments and suggestions on these before implementing
> them in the main distribution.
On about.html, it says Ian Jackson, but it was Ian Murdock who started
Debian. I doubt the date was 1996, (I'm thinking earlier).
--
see shy jo
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM TH
21 matches
Mail list logo
