Talk:Proposed Color Scheme

Vote Tally (Ayes)

Paste your name (~~~~) in the table to support one of the schemes.

Votes in Favor
Current Scheme	Proposed Scheme
Green Dragon 16:39, 1 March 2007 (MST)
Cúthalion 18:59, 4 March 2007 (MST)
Armond 12:01, 6 March 2007 (MST)

Support: Current Scheme

Current Scheme: I don't mind the current scheme, but the proposed scheme is pretty bad so I will not vote for it. To me (a red-green colorblind person), #4 looks unacceptable. It looks almost baby-blue and it does not look visited at all. #5 looks like #6 (barely a difference). I don't like the changes, however I will never know how much of a difference it means to non-red-green colorblind person. Sorry I am placing my vote here, however I like the current one more than the proposed. BTW, try getting colors from sites like colorlab. Also, to see how this would look like to a red-green color-blind person check out this. --Green Dragon 16:39, 1 March 2007 (MST)

Current Scheme: Since one of my goals was to get something that's colorblind-friendly, I'll have to vote against the change until we get it right. I'll see if I can come up with a better proposal using colorlab. I have to say, looking at the page through the colorblind filter, the distinction between #3 and #4 looks no worse in the new scheme than in the old scheme, and possibly a little bit better -- but obviously not good enough. --Cúthalion 18:59, 4 March 2007 (MST)

I'm very much inclined to agree. I hadn't realized how poor the contrast is (for a colorblind person), and so far I haven't been able to come up with anything much better that would suit both colorblind and full-vision people. Thanks for pointing us to that site, though, Green Dragon, since it is difficult for those with color-vision to determine what will look good to color-blind people! For now I am abstaining, since I don't much prefer either the old nor the new scheme (for different reasons). —EldritchNumen 19:24, 4 March 2007 (MST)

By the way the colorfilter is not 100% the same as I see it - even though it is very close. The Background looks duller and #6 looks a little different; a little duller. Other than that I hope you can find a scheme that works for all kinds of people and I am sorry for shooting down this attempt. --Green Dragon 23:13, 4 March 2007 (MST)

Current Scheme: I like the current scheme, but I think it would be better with #1 of the proposed scheme. Armond 12:01, 6 March 2007 (MST)

Support: Proposed Scheme

Proposed Scheme: I much like this schema. The colors are all brighter, more pleasing to the eye, and more distinct from the background. I think it adds excitement and functionality. Thanks to Cúthalion for putting this scheme together. —EldritchNumen 01:02, 1 March 2007 (MST)

gollark: I have no idea what I did which made it do *that*.

gollark: And it draws that whole taskbar thing at the bottom *just* for the `start` button, since this "OS" is monotasking and doesn't actually have windowing support at all.

gollark: The `settings` option doesn't work, `programs` is only Paint and LuaIDE, and there's no way to get a shell except the `run` button.

gollark: Also, you're doing fake loading bars in startup, which is basically evil.

gollark: Onto what seems to break it, it looks like the paste you download as `/os/google/google` or whatever is no longer available, and your downloader program does not actually detect this.

This article is issued from Dandwiki. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.