- From: <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 13:26:53 +0100
- To: public-i18n-ethiopic@w3.org
hi Daniel, i think Martin answered all your questions at least as well, and probably better than i could. cheers, ri On 04/05/2016 12:41, Martin J. Dürst wrote: > Hello Daniel, > > On 2016/05/03 12:15, Daniel Yacob wrote: >> A small annoyance of mine is having to change MS Word's default header >> colors from blue to black. I read somewhere that Microsoft determined >> that >> most of the documents produced with Word would be digital and that blue >> looked better on a screen. I do like blue in the headers of W3C >> standards >> in HTML, but have never liked it in documents. That's just my subjective >> view. >> >> Richard do you know the rationale behind the text color choices in W3C >> publications? > > These color choices go way back to ca. 2000. See e.g. > https://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210 and > https://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006. > > I think it mostly has to do with the W3C logo and its color. > >> Presumably, blue headers would be universally desirable in all scripts >> and >> languages for digital documents. > > I just wanted to try in my version of Word. But then I found out that I > don't know how to tell it to make something a header. That's how rarely > I use it. But anyway, I don't remember when I have last seen a document > with blue headers, except for the W3C Technical Reports (and those that > copied that style). > >> Is blue acceptable for Ethiopic? > > I have no idea, sorry. > > >> It occurs to me that it may be advantageous to apply a style sheet >> that set >> the color of hulet neteb to an off-black hue, perhaps a dark gray. Which >> possibly would help it in its job as a word separator by being even more >> visually distinct while not distracting. Is there a shade that would >> help >> increase line parsing and thus reading speed? > > To answer that, you probably have to make actual experiments. But > readability depends on many factors, so you may need quite a large > number of subjects. > > Regards, Martin. > >
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2016 12:29:02 UTC