Re: Themeable colors

[Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman Sun COM>]

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 '-)

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...

where should we continue this discussion?

- Bill

> -JP
>