W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2000

Re: monochrome

From: Tim Bannister <isoma@compsoc.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 09:51:27 +0000 (GMT)
To: John Lewis <gleemax@altavista.com>
cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0002250948540.10161-100000@mrbusy.compsoc.man.ac.uk>
On 24 Feb 2000, John Lewis wrote:

>Matthew Brealey wrote:
>
>>At present it is - colour ink is very expensive, so to waste
>>your customer/page viewer's money on colour ink, which adds
>>nothing to printed pages (black is almost always better and
>>much faster).
>
>Is something wrong with letting the user decide for himself?
>I'm not aware of any web browser that doesn't let the user
>choose how to print his documents--if there are problems
>that CSS should address, you have my apologies.

A page that looks OK on a colour display, or printed in colour, might
be hard to read in monochrome.  I read a UK paper that's printed in
colour in London and in mono in Manchester, and sometimes (presumably
when last-minute changes have been made) the Manchester edition is very
hard to read, usually because of a lack of contrast.

One solution is to design with a mono rendering in mind; another is to
distinguish style suggestions for colour and mono display.

-- 
Tim Bannister - isoma@compsoc.man.ac.uk
  "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
     - Benjamin Disraeli
Received on Friday, 25 February 2000 04:51:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:04 GMT