On Sat, Apr 10, 2004 at 02:28:34AM +0200, Marc A. Lehmann wrote: > On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 05:58:00AM -0400, Thomas Dickey <dickey@radix.net> wrote: > > > If an app uses it as fg and this is bad, then I think that app has a > > > problem, not the terminal emulator, which, after all, just offers a fairly > > > standardized colour set. > > > > But it's not standardized. > > Depends. It's standardized in some local standards, used in about all > existing implementations (see the bug report for a comparison between > terminal emulators on unix) and was documented for many years. > > I would call that pretty much standardized. What you mean is probably > that there is no real standard the mandates that with force. > > That is of course true. Neither the w3c nor the ietf nor... will care a > bit which exact colour is used in xterm or elsewhere :) That's common practice, not standardization. With proper standardization comes expert advice. I don't think the xterm color defaults, or the defaults used by other terminal emulators, were selected with the aid of expert advice. They were picked because they were color values close to some ANSI terminal standard (I don't know which one) -- and which could be easily encoded in a 4-bit colormap. I think the colors in common practice were the product initially of technological constraints, and subsequently due to laziness, inertia, and code reuse. That's not standardization. -- G. Branden Robinson | One doesn't have a sense of humor. Debian GNU/Linux | It has you. branden@debian.org | -- Larry Gelbart http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature