From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: color-grey-p and black?
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:33:19 -0400
Message-ID: <E1ELOl5-0007o0-QA@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <4338545C.9080003@gnu.org> <E1EKfSA-0001vI-80@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<u1x39hwlh.fsf@gnu.org> <E1EKz73-00015x-SY@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<87br2bq5kg.fsf@wigwam.deepwood.net>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1128101972 19226 80.91.229.2 (30 Sep 2005 17:39:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:39:32 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 30 19:39:31 2005
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ELOqD-0002Wi-Ui
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:38:38 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ELOqD-0004DD-9w
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:38:37 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ELOn1-0002aF-1a
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:35:19 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ELOmp-0002UQ-5p
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:35:08 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ELOmj-0002TH-S0
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:35:01 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ELOl7-0006FV-1l
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:33:21 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1ELOl5-0007o0-QA; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:33:19 -0400
Original-To: Daniel Brockman <daniel@brockman.se>
In-reply-to: <87br2bq5kg.fsf@wigwam.deepwood.net> (message from Daniel
	Brockman on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:03:43 +0200)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:43395
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/43395>

    What about colors that are very close to white?

They are accepted by the current criterion.

However, the current criterion was rather ad hoc.  I wrote it with no
expertise about such matters.  I suspect that someone who knows a lot
about color issues could suggest a better algorithm.