Any logical explanation why females have got that much better deal with colors than guys from the evolution?

Sure, I completely agree that faces are better to work with then plain colors. Imaginary framework could have co exist of base-faces and accent-faces instead of base-colors and accent-colors (if this separation is even acceptable).


-------- Originalmeddelande --------
Från: tomas@tuxteam.de
Datum: 2020-09-16 18:43 (GMT+01:00)
Till: Arthur Miller <arthur.miller@live.com>
Kopia: João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com>, emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
Ämne: Re: A modern-mode?

On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 02:40:53PM +0200, Arthur Miller wrote:
> João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >                          I just meant the "custom-themes"
> > infrastructure should be enough to accommodate enough of
> > the proposed "modern-mode".  Not sure if it is (as I don't use it).
> No, it is not. It lacks unified framework to use as logicla names for
> color use;

Isn't "face" the better abstraction, anyway? Think blind people.
Think color-blind people (up to 8% of the male and 0.5% of the
female population of Norther European descent [1]).

Conveying semantics via color has to have some fallback, and
this meshes well with faces, I think.

Cheers

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness

 - t