Glynn Clements <glynn(a)sensei.co.uk> writes:
> What does 'normal colors stuffed' mean?
By `normal' colours, I mean light background, dark foreground. If
(like me) you have a dark background, then you need to use light
foreground colours. Doing this for text is simple enough. Doing it for
Xpm images is also straightforward (via xpm-color-symbols), provided
that they have symbolic colours defined.
I understand (I also use a black background for all my XEmacsens and terms...)
However, if all of the images simply contain hardcoded colour
settings, the overall appearance tends to get worse the further your
colour scheme is from that of whoever designed the images.
This could be solved with a colour scheme adaption by using a private palette
tag withing the png. png allows the user to define his own tags. This does not
break the png for standart viewers, but adds extra info for enhanced viewers
(for example a extinsion which save the formular and edge params of a fractal
to recreate the graphic).
Worse still, once people start using full-colour images as icons and
doing things like blending the edges of an image against a specific
background colour, you end up with images that look crap against any
other background colour. The one from the splash screen is a good
For this png provides full alpha. So the software can do the blending.
> > > PNG provides lossless, highly compressed graphics with
24 bit color. It
> > > is superior to everything that we are currently using.
> > Except Xpm.
> Why is XPM superiour to PNG? Cause it's plain text?
That's an advantage (IMHO), but the main issue for me is symbolic
We can also do this using png.