Stas Bekman wrote:
>
> allan wrote:
>
> > hi
> >
> > please -1, 0, or +1 this impulsive idea of highlighting the
> > pre-text. i have never seen this anywhere before and maybe
> > theres a reason :-)
>
> -1, it makes the text harder to read.
eh, how can it be harder to read? i mean on this gif-example
the code is highligted with the same color as we currently
use as background for the whole <pre>-section which again
curerently is seated on a white background of the whole
content-box, right? so theoretically the gif-example should
be easier to read as the code here is highligted and then
sits immidiately on a dark-colored background and not a
white background.
anyway, no need to argue. the primary reason why i sent that
as a suggestion was because the current light-bluish color
doesn't really work IMO
> > i have used a darker bgcolor and the same highlight color
> > that was bgcolor before. it also looks the same in the
> > different browsers i have access to.
> >
> >
> > please also note that the use of this bgcolor (#829DA6) is
> > quite cool as background-color at the .table-top {
> > background-color:#829DA6; } that are used for "headers" in
> > the left area. try it at home ;-)
> I'm very uncomfortable yet to move to the web-unsafe color-map. I
> suggest that we stick with at least something that's close to the safe
> color-map, i.e. use XXYYZZ triplets.
fair enough, but with that argument we need to drop the
heavy use of the ASF-colours as well, no?
./allan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
