Re: Themeable colors

[JP Rosevear <jpr novell com>]

On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 11:04 +0100, Bill Haneman wrote:
> JP Rosevear wrote:...
> 
> >>So to extend the current notion of SELECTED, PRELIGHT, FG, BG, BASE, TEXT, we need other style names that indicate the context in which a color is to be used, but not its hue or value.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Something like "HIGHLIGHT" might be nice, useful in Evolution for things
> >like outlining the current day in the mini calendar, draw Marcus-Baines
> >lines, highlight overdue tasks.
> >  
> >
> It's a thankless job, but I suggest those of us who muck about with 
> theme colors the most (like evo guys for etable, Calum, myself, etc.) 
> get together and define a set of styles, and (even more importantly) 
> which ones are expected to be used where.  For instance, we might need 
> HIGHLIGHT_1, HIGHLIGHT_2 which should be used with FILL_1, FILL_2 etc. 
> since otherwise it will be difficult to write applications that are 
> legible with multiple themes.  For instance, 'text' should be painted on 
> 'base', not 'bg', etc. in current themes.  If we don't define "which 
> goes with which", apps will only look right when used with the 
> application developers' favorite theme '-)

Well, I'd be happy if etable just went away (we need some issues
resolved with gtktreeview first though), however we'd need it for other
things as well, many apps do - tomboy for the title color of notes is
another example.

> This implies also that we need not only new style state enumerations, 
> but also GC's in addition to 'text', 'base', 'fg', 'bg'; as you suggest 
> we may need 'highlight', 'link_fg', 'link_bg', 'fg2', 'bg2', 'base2',  
> 'text2', etc. and rules such as "text2 should only be painted over 
> base2", "highlight should be visible against 'bg', 'bg2', 'base', 
> 'base2'".  Or perhaps we would need two highlight colors as well...

What do you see as the issue to something like fg[HIGHTLIGHT] and
bg[HIGHLIGHT]?

-JP
-- 
JP Rosevear <jpr novell com>
Novell, Inc.