Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
Blue should definitely NOT be used for x-ref text.
I personally do not like blue for user input (or another other purpose
where the colour is supposed to convey information; in headings colour
is eye candy). Colours often don't differentiate well when printed in
black-and-white, even if there are no on-screen issues for
colour-blind readers.
Deselecting colors (or most other things) via intelligent use of styles
for the relatively few hard copies of the docs could easily be handled
in the master documents used for the print docs. So, that is mostly a
non-issue with regard to online viewing.
Furthermore, I doubt that many (any?) Webmasters would eliminate colors
in their Web pages because of some potential color-blindness of viewers.
Perhaps, the 1.3% of monochromats
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorblindness> (in the US) are getting
the short end of the stick in this regard, but that's life...
I definitely agree with Gary about not using quotation marks around
user input.
BTW, I thought Gary had made a style for that blue stuff. It should
show up in the style list in the chapters that use it.
IMO we should minimise typographical changes. Usually they just cause
"noise" or clutter in the docs, or draw undue emphasis to some items,
without adding any real value. They also increase the complexity of
things for authors/editors to remember to do, which is one reason why
there is so much inconsistency among the chapters of a single book,
and even more between books.
If we minimise the use of typographical changes, then we don't need to
inform the readers of what they mean. IMO if typography needs to be
explained, then we probably shouldn't be using it.
Vance Packard
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vance_Packard#The_Hidden_Persuaders> would
probably not agree with this, and his influence in this field can be
seen anytime one enters a commercial retail establishment the past half
century. Subliminal tactics, including colors used, in everyday life
have been influencing persuasion (or assisting readers, for example) and
will continue to do so.
It's a common practice in technical guides to include a brief section
within the front stuff regarding what the typographical conventions are,
along with an example or two of how each type would appear in the text.
This should impose zero problems to OOo docs, and many readers are
already accustomed to their use, especially in software guides that
contain a plethora of categories or other elements. Not everything
non-vanilla is "eye candy." (US quotation punctuation used here...)
And lastly: Gary knows I think ragged-right is MUCH better than
fully-justified text (long explanation omitted, as I have no time to
type it or look up references), and automatic hyphenation is an
abomination to be avoided at all times.
--Jean
I'll leave this issue for later.
Gary
--
Gary Schnabl
2775 Honorah
Detroit MI 48209
(734) 245-3324
