Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:25:43 -0400 From: Bill Vermillion <bv@wjv.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fancy rc startup style RFC Message-ID: <20060420132543.GB37150@wjv.com> In-Reply-To: <20060420035530.F1A5A16A4E0@hub.freebsd.org> References: <20060420035530.F1A5A16A4E0@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
While stranded on the shoulder of the Information Superhiway and trying to flag down some passing bytes freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org said "Bits don't fail me now", and continued with: > Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:03:57 -0400 > From: "Coleman Kane" <zombyfork@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fancy rc startup style RFC > On 4/19/06, Mike Meyer <mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers.102a7e@mired.org> wrote: > > In > > <346a80220604190900i3bfc3b54v93a4c6c30f0dfc4f@mail.gmail.com>, > > Coleman Kane <zombyfork@gmail.com> typed: > > > On 4/19/06, Mike Meyer > > > <mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers.102a7e@mired.org wrote: > > > How about we all discuss good choices for "default" colors? > > Depends on the goal: do you want the default to work for > > everyone, or do you want the default to be prettier and/or > > better for most people but absolutely suck for a few? > I was thinking perhaps of having a predefined set of templates > (with the option and documentation to add your own). Perhaps > implement one that creates the "traffic-light" style that seems > to make intuitive sense to many americans (Bold Red: error, Bold > Green: Success, Bold Yellow: warning/notice), and also have > another perdefined one that uses a different color set. "Traffic-light" style is also designed to be useable by completely color-blind people - which is rare. By that if you notice traffic lights are always in the same order, green, yellow, red so that all you have to do is be able to see the luminance value in the abscence of any chroma information.. That's the problem with web-sites which depend on chroma value, and often have colors which are easily discernable by normally sighted people, but the luminance is very close which can make things almost invisible. I have a noticed a traffic-sign problem which another person also wrote to the local newspaper - and the traffic division is looking to change the signs. In Florida bright days are indeed very bright. There are signs that use lights to spell out the message with what someone feels the most important part in 'red'. The signs have a black background. On a bright day I see "NO TURN ON " or "TO PEDS" as the word RED in the first message is invisible to me, and the YIELD in the second has the same effect. There is also a sign that I came up to that used the universal sign for turn. I started to turn and my wife had me stop because the circle with bar through it was in RED and I could not see it. On overcast days or at night these signs are easily viewable. For those of you who remember the late 1980s when IBM came out with OS/2 and MS came out with a new Windows, the complaints were the default screens on OS/2 were drab while the Windows had bright colors. IBM is very good at designing things for people with disabilites and the OS/2 default screen was designed to be readable by someone with total color-blindness - which as I said is rare. The way to check if a web-site is readable by all it to use a monochrome monitor [ exceedingly hard to find nowdays ], and at least some government sites are now required to be that way. Color can be a great way to emphasize items >IF< the chroma and luminance values are carefully chosen. If not you can take away a lot of functionality. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060420132543.GB37150>