in reply to font (ab)using?

I think that the post by Coyo is an acceptable use of color - although I don't really see any benefit in the use of colour there, the text is already quite clear.
The other examples you give I find quite annoying - I can't see any reason why a big block of text needs to be coloured in this way. Maybe I'm getting old but I think good old Black and White is the best way of displaying info.
The only real use of colour that I can think of is to highlight a small section of text and even then italic or bold text is probably clearer.
Just my £0.02

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: RE: font (ab)using?
by BBQ (Curate) on Jun 02, 2000 at 08:49 UTC
    I agree with that last part. While I use alot of HTML in my posts, I try to keep away from coloring anything. There are a number of ways to drive attention by with italics, bold or underline (although I always associate underlined text with links right off the bat).

    I see no need for coloring text. Truth be told, the usage of coloring will only screw it up for fellow monks that are using dark themes and/or pagers. I think my sig is a perfectly good example of good font usage (although it used to be a bit too big, and I inserted a size="-1" after a while).

    #!/home/bbq/bin/perl
    # Trust no1!
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion