Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On 18.2.5 1:1, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: ~ ~ I would hope there are addons out there for light-on-dark text that do not require CSS knowledge.) https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/dark-background-light-text/ Usable, though it seems that some sites do not work with it. 4 different ways to try to make the page be light on dark, plus as a 5th mode. granular to domain or page or other. can be disabled <>. has a tool-bar--button. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 08:28:19PM -0500, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:10:06PM +0100, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
> >
> > I believe websites should use either default colors or custom colored
> > dark on light text like most websites. Those who don’t like it can
> > override the stylesheet colors like they have to do for most websites,
> > i.e.
>
> Not as easy to do as it should be. I once changed the default browser
> settings to be white foreground and black background. I came to hate
> the websites that override the default foreground without overriding the
> default background or vice versa. I end up with dark on black or light
> on white.
>
> -- hendrik
>
Did you use !important for overriding? I did not try it for long, but
I believe this CSS should override *all* sites:
* {
color : white !important;
background-color : black !important;
}
a {
color : cyan !important;
}
(See https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Cascade though I
would hope there are addons out there for light-on-dark text that do
not require CSS knowledge.)
___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 09:02:10AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, February 02, 2018 09:30:10 PM Hendrik Boom wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 06:10:57PM +, Alexander Ross wrote: > > > Re Webpage background, heh yea im the opposite, i find it harder to read > > > a white/light background. saying that my email client is set to use > > > light blue... lately ive been using owl firefox addon[1] for changing > > > websites themes to a dark one. found it to give me relief from eye > > > strain :). > > > > I prefer light text on a dark background. Especially at night, when the > > screen otherwise becomes glaringly bright. It also reduces flicker on > > slow-refresh monitors. > > > > And as for the letter-thinning you experience with white text -- that's > > exactly what I perceive with white text! I think it is an effect of > > slight lack of focus. with a bright background it eaats into the letter > > shapes, but if the shapes become a little blurry they are still quie > > readable. > > > > I son't understand how the opposite effect which you report arises. > > I guess you mean why I see that thinning effect with light text on a dark > background? Interesting. > > I guess it could be: >* our eyes trained differently >* our eyes function differently--I have astigmatism, but it is corrected > by > my glasses so I don't think that is a factor >* different tools on our computers render the fonts differently? (I'm not > sure I know what, in the end, actually renders the fonts on my computer--is > it > X (assuming my Wheezy installation is using X), or is it different for > different > apps? > > I did find a bug report not too long ago for some application which actually > confirmed the bias I described, and described how that worked (in general > terms)--I'll make a cursory search or try to remember where I found that, > and, > if I do, I'll post it here. > > Of course, the one URL which Florian posted did provide some reasons why dark > text on a light background is generallly better for your eyes (iirc the > article). > > https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/53264/dark-or-white-color-theme-is- > better-for-the-eyes# It argues that with more light the eye has more information to use to focus properly. But if focus isn't proper for whatever reason, I think white letters becoming blurry are more readable than white background invading the thin black lines. I discovered this long ago in the days of fuzzy CRTs. I wonder what physical media those experiments werre carried out with. -- hendrik ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:10:06PM +0100, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > > I believe websites should use either default colors or custom colored > dark on light text like most websites. Those who don’t like it can > override the stylesheet colors like they have to do for most websites, > i.e. Not as easy to do as it should be. I once changed the default browser settings to be white foreground and black background. I came to hate the websites that override the default foreground without overriding the default background or vice versa. I end up with dark on black or light on white. -- hendrik ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Saturday, February 03, 2018 01:32:37 PM pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 01:23:58PM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > I said I wasn't going to post anymore, but I'm interested--I tried ps -Al > > } grep HarfBuzz (and harfbuzz) on my Debian Wheezy system with kde--no > > sign of it--does KDE use something else? > > KDE uses Qt which uses HarfBuzz. You can see it in the dependencies at > > https://packages.debian.org/sid/libqt5gui5 > > However HarfBuzz is not a separate process but runs as part of the > graphical application (it is a library), so you do not see it in > ps -Al. Thanks! (Subsequently I looked up HarfBuzz on Wikipedia and got a little better understanding.) ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 01:23:58PM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, February 03, 2018 11:10:06 AM pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 09:02:10AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > > I guess it could be: > > >* our eyes trained differently > > >* our eyes function differently--I have astigmatism, but it is > > >corrected by > > > > > > my glasses so I don't think that is a factor > > > > > >* different tools on our computers render the fonts differently? (I'm > > >not > > > > > > sure I know what, in the end, actually renders the fonts on my > > > computer--is it X (assuming my Wheezy installation is using X), or is it > > > different for different apps? > > > > X is only used for font rendering in old applications like xterm. > > Modern applications on GNU operating systems use HarfBuzz. > > I said I wasn't going to post anymore, but I'm interested--I tried ps -Al } > grep HarfBuzz (and harfbuzz) on my Debian Wheezy system with kde--no sign of > it--does KDE use something else? > KDE uses Qt which uses HarfBuzz. You can see it in the dependencies at https://packages.debian.org/sid/libqt5gui5 However HarfBuzz is not a separate process but runs as part of the graphical application (it is a library), so you do not see it in ps -Al. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Saturday, February 03, 2018 01:23:58 PM rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > I said I wasn't going to post anymore, but I'm interested--I tried ps -Al } > grep HarfBuzz (and harfbuzz) on my Debian Wheezy system with kde--no sign > of it--does KDE use something else? Oh, now I see--from Wikipedia: ` Most applications don't use HarfBuzz directly, but use a UI toolkit library that integrates with it. HarfBuzz is used by the UI libraries of GNOME, KDE, Chrome OS, Android[2] and Java;[6] and directly by applications Firefox, LibreOffice and Inkscape.[2] ' ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Saturday, February 03, 2018 11:10:06 AM pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 09:02:10AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > I guess it could be: > >* our eyes trained differently > >* our eyes function differently--I have astigmatism, but it is > >corrected by > > > > my glasses so I don't think that is a factor > > > >* different tools on our computers render the fonts differently? (I'm > >not > > > > sure I know what, in the end, actually renders the fonts on my > > computer--is it X (assuming my Wheezy installation is using X), or is it > > different for different apps? > > X is only used for font rendering in old applications like xterm. > Modern applications on GNU operating systems use HarfBuzz. I said I wasn't going to post anymore, but I'm interested--I tried ps -Al } grep HarfBuzz (and harfbuzz) on my Debian Wheezy system with kde--no sign of it--does KDE use something else? ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 09:02:10AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > I guess it could be: >* our eyes trained differently >* our eyes function differently--I have astigmatism, but it is corrected > by > my glasses so I don't think that is a factor >* different tools on our computers render the fonts differently? (I'm not > sure I know what, in the end, actually renders the fonts on my computer--is > it > X (assuming my Wheezy installation is using X), or is it different for > different > apps? > X is only used for font rendering in old applications like xterm. Modern applications on GNU operating systems use HarfBuzz. If yours is a technical issue, it is either your screen settings (brightness/contrast), font settings (like antialiasing, subpixel rendering) or really a bug in font rendering. That said, I set my desktop to use larger than default fonts so I don’t have issues. I believe websites should use either default colors or custom colored dark on light text like most websites. Those who don’t like it can override the stylesheet colors like they have to do for most websites, i.e. https://superuser.com/questions/318912/how-to-override-the-css-of-a-site-in-firefox-with-usercontent-css ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
Ahh, I intend that this be my last post on the subject, because it is pretty much OT for this list, but I re-read the bug report and saw a paragraph that was there before, but seems to have sunk in now: ` Fontconfig has nothing to do with presenting the glyphs to the user, it simply selects the fonts. The bug you are seeing (and, yes, I agree that it is a bug even if white text on a black background is wrong) is due to limitations in various rendering libraries, like Xrender, cairo et al. ' On Saturday, February 03, 2018 09:14:45 AM rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, February 03, 2018 09:02:10 AM rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > I did find a bug report not too long ago for some application which > > actually confirmed the bias I described, and described how that worked > > (in general terms)--I'll make a cursory search or try to remember where > > I found that, and, if I do, I'll post it here. > > Ahh, that was easier than I expected--here are my notes after reading that > bug report (some time ago)--I did not re-read it today to see if anything > has changed. The comments immediately after the [[][]] > are my own, the things after the ` are quotations from the bug report. > >* [[https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13431][Bug 13431: > Summary: Gamma not taken into account, white on black hard to read]]--this > confirms my observation of the problem, but my explanation (iirc) predates > gamma correction (iir/uc)--my theory of the cause of the problem is that > anti- aliasing sort of "assumed" that the normal view would be black on > white, when it was applied to white on black, it should have somehow > considered the other "color" (black or white) to be the basis--because it > didn't, fewer pixels are colored white when viewing white on black as > opposed to the number of pixels colored black when viewing black on white. > I don't know if the problem still exists--it probably does in at least > some places, and, I still have more difficulty reading white (or a light > color) on a black (or dark background). ` > When doing antialiasing, fontconfig-based renderers do not take gamma into > account and assume a linear color space. This make black on white text > difficult to read at small font sizez. > > ... > > The reason is that the stems of the glyphs are thinner than a whole pixel. > Therefore, they get a fractionnal value. For example, the pixels on the > lower part of the stem of the 'f' get the pixel value 151/255 in black on > white, and 104/255 in white on black (and 104+151=255). With the usual 2.2 > gamma, this makes respectively 32% and 14%, which gives a contrast of 68% > for black on white, and 14% for white on black. > ' ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Saturday, February 03, 2018 09:02:10 AM rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > I did find a bug report not too long ago for some application which > actually confirmed the bias I described, and described how that worked (in > general terms)--I'll make a cursory search or try to remember where I > found that, and, if I do, I'll post it here. Ahh, that was easier than I expected--here are my notes after reading that bug report (some time ago)--I did not re-read it today to see if anything has changed. The comments immediately after the [[][]] are my own, the things after the ` are quotations from the bug report. * [[https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13431][Bug 13431: Summary: Gamma not taken into account, white on black hard to read]]--this confirms my observation of the problem, but my explanation (iirc) predates gamma correction (iir/uc)--my theory of the cause of the problem is that anti- aliasing sort of "assumed" that the normal view would be black on white, when it was applied to white on black, it should have somehow considered the other "color" (black or white) to be the basis--because it didn't, fewer pixels are colored white when viewing white on black as opposed to the number of pixels colored black when viewing black on white. I don't know if the problem still exists--it probably does in at least some places, and, I still have more difficulty reading white (or a light color) on a black (or dark background). ` When doing antialiasing, fontconfig-based renderers do not take gamma into account and assume a linear color space. This make black on white text difficult to read at small font sizez. ... The reason is that the stems of the glyphs are thinner than a whole pixel. Therefore, they get a fractionnal value. For example, the pixels on the lower part of the stem of the 'f' get the pixel value 151/255 in black on white, and 104/255 in white on black (and 104+151=255). With the usual 2.2 gamma, this makes respectively 32% and 14%, which gives a contrast of 68% for black on white, and 14% for white on black. ' ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Friday, February 02, 2018 09:30:10 PM Hendrik Boom wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 06:10:57PM +, Alexander Ross wrote: > > Re Webpage background, heh yea im the opposite, i find it harder to read > > a white/light background. saying that my email client is set to use > > light blue... lately ive been using owl firefox addon[1] for changing > > websites themes to a dark one. found it to give me relief from eye > > strain :). > > I prefer light text on a dark background. Especially at night, when the > screen otherwise becomes glaringly bright. It also reduces flicker on > slow-refresh monitors. > > And as for the letter-thinning you experience with white text -- that's > exactly what I perceive with white text! I think it is an effect of > slight lack of focus. with a bright background it eaats into the letter > shapes, but if the shapes become a little blurry they are still quie > readable. > > I son't understand how the opposite effect which you report arises. I guess you mean why I see that thinning effect with light text on a dark background? Interesting. I guess it could be: * our eyes trained differently * our eyes function differently--I have astigmatism, but it is corrected by my glasses so I don't think that is a factor * different tools on our computers render the fonts differently? (I'm not sure I know what, in the end, actually renders the fonts on my computer--is it X (assuming my Wheezy installation is using X), or is it different for different apps? I did find a bug report not too long ago for some application which actually confirmed the bias I described, and described how that worked (in general terms)--I'll make a cursory search or try to remember where I found that, and, if I do, I'll post it here. Of course, the one URL which Florian posted did provide some reasons why dark text on a light background is generallly better for your eyes (iirc the article). https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/53264/dark-or-white-color-theme-is- better-for-the-eyes# ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 06:10:57PM +, Alexander Ross wrote: > On 02/02/18 15:05, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:46:37 PM Alexander Ross wrote: > >> http://rhombus-tech.aross.me/webpagealt/ > > > > ... > > > >> I combined to logos people made and also made some little mods of my > >> own. i feel quite happy with the outcome :) feedback good to hear, what > >> ya would like to do , how ya feel.. > > > > I'd just like to point out that I, and perhaps other people (and still some > > systems) have a problem with light text on a darker background. > > > Re Logo, hmm idk what to do. might i try a darker yellow or something... hmm > > Re Webpage background, heh yea im the opposite, i find it harder to read > a white/light background. saying that my email client is set to use > light blue... lately ive been using owl firefox addon[1] for changing > websites themes to a dark one. found it to give me relief from eye > strain :). I prefer light text on a dark background. Especially at night, when the screen otherwise becomes glaringly bright. It also reduces flicker on slow-refresh monitors. And as for the letter-thinning you experience with white text -- that's exactly what I perceive with white text! I think it is an effect of slight lack of focus. with a bright background it eaats into the letter shapes, but if the shapes become a little blurry they are still quie readable. I son't understand how the opposite effect which you report arises. -- hendrik ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Friday, February 02, 2018 01:10:57 PM Alexander Ross wrote: > On 02/02/18 15:05, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:46:37 PM Alexander Ross wrote: > >> http://rhombus-tech.aross.me/webpagealt/ > > > > ... > > > >> I combined to logos people made and also made some little mods of my > >> own. i feel quite happy with the outcome :) feedback good to hear, what > >> ya would like to do , how ya feel.. > > > > I'd just like to point out that I, and perhaps other people (and still > > some systems) have a problem with light text on a darker background. > > Re Logo, hmm idk what to do. might i try a darker yellow or something... > hmm > > Re Webpage background, heh yea im the opposite, i find it harder to read > a white/light background. saying that my email client is set to use > light blue... lately ive been using owl firefox addon[1] for changing > websites themes to a dark one. found it to give me relief from eye > strain :). > > I agree the blue text colour has been on my mind, not sure what to > change it too. hmm when i feel like it ill have a play with different > colour schemes. > > Maybe it should be a status quo classic light back dark text colour > scheme which people like me use addons to invert the colours. i found it > fun to think: "bold project, bold colour scheme". hehe but ok, ill try > and balance peoples needs. Thanks! I do find that a non-white background is easier on my eyes than pure white--I've used various shades of beige, yellow, and rose to good effect-- still with black text. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On 02/02/18 15:05, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:46:37 PM Alexander Ross wrote: >> http://rhombus-tech.aross.me/webpagealt/ > > ... > >> I combined to logos people made and also made some little mods of my >> own. i feel quite happy with the outcome :) feedback good to hear, what >> ya would like to do , how ya feel.. > > I'd just like to point out that I, and perhaps other people (and still some > systems) have a problem with light text on a darker background. Re Logo, hmm idk what to do. might i try a darker yellow or something... hmm Re Webpage background, heh yea im the opposite, i find it harder to read a white/light background. saying that my email client is set to use light blue... lately ive been using owl firefox addon[1] for changing websites themes to a dark one. found it to give me relief from eye strain :). I agree the blue text colour has been on my mind, not sure what to change it too. hmm when i feel like it ill have a play with different colour schemes. Maybe it should be a status quo classic light back dark text colour scheme which people like me use addons to invert the colours. i found it fun to think: "bold project, bold colour scheme". hehe but ok, ill try and balance peoples needs. hmm hmm interesting to see how owl addon inverts the colours. it uses a light pink for background! looks not too bad... hmmm [1]http://owl.sidhant.io/ firefox addon ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Friday, February 02, 2018 11:42:16 AM pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 10:05:50AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > I'd just like to point out that I, and perhaps other people (and still > > some systems) have a problem with light text on a darker background. > > > > […] > > If you are using GNOME, try fixing the font settings in > gnome-tweak-tool (subpixel rendering etc.). Florian, Thanks! (I use kde.) > Either way, others > recommend dark text on light background as well: > > https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/53264/dark-or-white-color-theme-is-b > etter-for-the-eyes# Thanks also for that--interesting points that I didn't consider (still supporting dark text on light background), and, I do have astigmatism, which is probably a factor as well. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 10:05:50AM -0500, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:46:37 PM Alexander Ross wrote: > > http://rhombus-tech.aross.me/webpagealt/ > > ... > > > I combined to logos people made and also made some little mods of my > > own. i feel quite happy with the outcome :) feedback good to hear, what > > ya would like to do , how ya feel.. > > I'd just like to point out that I, and perhaps other people (and still some > systems) have a problem with light text on a darker background. > > […] If you are using GNOME, try fixing the font settings in gnome-tweak-tool (subpixel rendering etc.). Either way, others recommend dark text on light background as well: https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/53264/dark-or-white-color-theme-is-better-for-the-eyes# Regards, Florian ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
On Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:46:37 PM Alexander Ross wrote: > http://rhombus-tech.aross.me/webpagealt/ ... > I combined to logos people made and also made some little mods of my > own. i feel quite happy with the outcome :) feedback good to hear, what > ya would like to do , how ya feel.. I'd just like to point out that I, and perhaps other people (and still some systems) have a problem with light text on a darker background. It might just be my eyes, and I can usually overcome it by selecting the text in question, which makes it then appear as a dark text on a light background. There was, and probably still is one or more real bugs that cause the problem. I'll try to describe it, in my layman's terms. It has to do with the function that changes the intensity of pixels to make characters look "smoother". I guess there are several instances of a function like that, in different places. The problem is that, in at least some of those, there was a built-in bias (my choice of words--it wasn't an explicit fudge factor or such) such that when dark text is rendered on a lighter background, the function works correctly (or reasonably well), while when the function is applied to light text on a darker background, the function bias tends to make more pixels match the background, thus the strokes of the character look thinner (and are thinner, because more pixels match the background or closer to the background) than to the color of the text. I'm not even sure where those kind of functions are applied--I guess it is in the client computer (the computer ultimately displaying the text for the user), and there may be more than one such function on any give client computer (for rendering from different apps). Maybe the problem is in X, and maybe it has been fixed there (or in it's successor, which I can't remember the name of). Anyway, just wanted to point that out for your consideration. I've tried staring at your page, with the text selected and not selected and I definitely have trouble reading it unselected (i.e., light text on dark background), but I can't decide whether is it just my eyes or not (I've read dark text on light backgrounds a lot). ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
Re: [Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 5:46 PM, Alexander Ross wrote: > http://rhombus-tech.aross.me/webpagealt/ > more of alt homepage but felt like calling it generic webpage instead. eye-burning colours! col :) what does it look like with the blue and the purple reversed? > its a start, lots to do. using a designed i started for something else > so its has ref to a background image that dont exist, etc. css needs > more work but its taking the beginnings of a shape :) i prefer the square letters / numbers, all in a line. ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
[Arm-netbook] Alt Webpage & Logo Combo
http://rhombus-tech.aross.me/webpagealt/ more of alt homepage but felt like calling it generic webpage instead. its a start, lots to do. using a designed i started for something else so its has ref to a background image that dont exist, etc. css needs more work but its taking the beginnings of a shape :) I combined to logos people made and also made some little mods of my own. i feel quite happy with the outcome :) feedback good to hear, what ya would like to do , how ya feel.. should really put efforts into modding wiki page... but this fresh start would have a diff outcome than fitting around existing wiki design... but yea i think i should face up to having ago at wiki css... just dont feel like it currently... so i thought i’d see how this goes. idk if ill manage to do any more... i guess ill see if i get inspired some more and rev up to it :) I would really like some/to get more photos of the cards and housings to play about making some pics that help people to go "arr i get it". As they browse and scroll down :) ___ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
