License Prices, Real, and docs

[Troy Rollins]

On Sunday, June 9, 2002, at 09:46  PM, Judy Perry wrote:

>
>> I would suggest making glossary links a very deep blue, which would not
>> contrast dramatically with the black text of the documentation, yet
>> would provide a clue that there is some additional information if one 
>> is
>> so inclined.
>
> Here's one example of why it's a no-no:  the human eye has few enough 
> blue
> photoreceptors to begin with (we see more shades of green), but even the
> few we have simply are NOT located at the center of our vision.  
> Remember
> the old 3D horror movies?  Blue recedes and Red advances.  Blue text
> causes eye fatigue unless it's SOOO dark as to be virtually black, in
> which case you've lost your contrast maximization.  Red is better (at
> least those photoreceptors are at/near the center), but Red has other
> problems (for western society, for example, it can sound warning bells).

Exactly my thoughts regarding red. I guess I suggest VERY dark blue as 
something of a compromise - almost invisible, yet somewhat discernible 
if you are looking for it. I'd be happy enough with red, blue, shaded 
backgrounds, whatever. Transcript is SO huge, that any tools to help get 
around the docs, learn more, learn faster - are ALL welcome in my book. 
To tell the truth, I guess I have myself trained, I can read almost any 
"marked up" electronic document without being too distracted by the 
markings, as I would imagine can many developers - but then, I guess the 
Revolution docs are meant to be attractive, uh... for the general 
public's reading comfort... or something?

I imagine that once I have printed docs, the point may be moot. The 
content of the Rev documentation is quite good, the methodology of 
delivery, to be kind, doesn't suit my personal tastes.
--
Troy
RPSystems, LTD
www.rpsystems.net