GNU bug report logs -
#41544
26.3; Possible incorrect results from color-distance
Previous Next
Full log
Message #109 received at 41544 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> -(defun css--contrasty-color (name)
>> - "Return a color that contrasts with NAME.
>> -NAME is of any form accepted by `color-distance'.
>> -The returned color will be usable by Emacs and will contrast
>> -with NAME; in particular so that if NAME is used as a background
>> -color, the returned color can be used as the foreground and still
>> -be readable."
>> - ;; See bug#25525 for a discussion of this.
>> - (if (> (color-distance name "black") 292485)
>> - "black" "white"))
>> -
>> (defcustom css-fontify-colors t
>> "Whether CSS colors should be fontified using the color as the background.
>> When non-`nil', a text representing CSS color will be fontified
>> @@ -1199,7 +1188,8 @@ css--fontify-region
>> (add-text-properties
>> start (point)
>> (list 'face (list :background color
>> - :foreground (css--contrasty-color color)
>> + :foreground (readable-foreground-color
>> + color)
>> :box '(:line-width -1))))))))))))
>> extended-region))
>
> Here, once again I will ask what practical problem is being fixed.
I can't comment on the patch overall, but this part at least seems to
address Richard Copley's complaints in bug#30295. A dark foreground is
now used for #0f0/rgba(0,255,0,0.5) and #5e5 as Richard requested, which
indeed looks more readable to me too.
Maybe the pendulum has swung too far however. For instance, a dark
foreground is now used for #ef716e, which I think was easier to read
with the light foreground used before. Could that be fixed by tweaking
the cut-off values in color-dark-p, perhaps?
-- Simen
This bug report was last modified 4 years and 304 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.