Hi,
why was the possibility to colorize texts via pulldown menu removed with the new forum?
Can this be reinstalled for the usual basic colors?
My text is blue.
My text is blue. Bold
My text is red.
Use this format:
[color=blue] My text is blue. [/color]
My color is not blue.
It that official ? I use it sometimes.
How about the strike through ? Can that be used as well ?
And the horizontal rule ?
I know the bb and html code. That is not the point. Earlier in the old forum there was color selection in the editor. This has disappeared with the new forum. I would like to have that again.
There are now multiple themes in use, so a text color that has good contrast on one theme's background may not on another. Then you must consider color blindness. A text color with good contrast for you might not have it for someone else.
So I'm not sure it makes sense to encourage the frivolous use of colored text. In the cases where you really need it, the BBCode is there for you.
I will gladly trade the color picker of the old forum for the inline code tags and superior list creation capabilities provided via the Markdown support of the new one. In fact, my main use of color was out of desperation for some way to visually differentiate code from the rest of the sentence.
I am not convinced that inline code is visually differentiated sufficiently to make it useful, although I do use it
I can't remember what happened on the old forum if you tried to use inline code; I know that with the new forum, we at least don't have to pay attention to [], * and similar.
That is my main motivation for using it here, but I prefer to use "code" tags so that the code really stands out from the text
Can I ask, Did you notice the "code" in reply #6 when you first read it ?
Yes, because it's a non-proportional font and slightly smaller.
If I remember correctly, it would create a regular code block. So this:
foo [code]bar[/code] baz
would render as the old forum's equivalent of this:
foo
bar
baz
I believe the closest thing the old forum had to inline code tags was [tt], but that only made a minor font change and did not disable markup rendering inside the block like `` does.
Are you saying there is a difference between [code]foo[/code] and `foo`?
There is also a gray background on the text. It does not have a very strong contrast against the white default theme background or the black dark theme background though.
This is inline code digitalRead(inPin); using singe backticks
This is a code block on a different line
digitalRead(inPin);OK I understand. But sometimes it just doesn't make sense to create a code block.
For example:
The
digitalReadfunction takes an Arduino pin number as its argument.
vs
The
digitalReadfunction takes an Arduino pin number as its argument.
I notice that GitHub has better contrast for the inline code markup than the forum.
Forum ("Theme default" theme):
GitHub ("Light default" theme):
Forum ("Dark" theme):
GitHub ("Dark default" theme):
I would not use a code block if all I wanted to do was to quote the name of a function. neither would I use single backticks
What I might do is, the digitalRead() function takes an Arduino pin number as its argument, and I would always put the brackets after the function name as they belong there
The single backticks really only have a purpose when the quoted code might be interpreted the wrong way by the forum software but they can also be used in conjunction with bold text to make the code stand out better than just a change of font and a vague grey background
The digitalRead() function takes an Arduino pin number as its argument.
I miss the TT font that was useful to highlight possibly function names or Serial Monitor output for example and that would support the color tag too (the single tick thingy adds some color and you can't have bold or italic)
The backticks also change the font.
It does:
foo [color=blue]`bar`[/color] baz
renders as:
foo bar baz
You can.
foo `bar` baz
(no emphasis)
renders as:
foo bar baz
foo **`bar`** baz
(bold)
renders as:
foo bar baz
foo _`bar`_ baz
(italic)
renders as:
foo bar baz
foo **_`bar`_** baz
(bold, italic)
renders as:
foo bar baz
1 Like
thanks, I meant the color tags did not work within the backticks.
One complaint I had was that using one backtick does have a grey backgroud
but I did not realise that if you selected a color then the background would go away
one backtick within a color tag does not have a grey backgroud ➜ cool
Yeah, but the equivalent [nobbc] tag on the old forum was the same way.
This markdown:
foo `[color=blue]bar[/color]` baz
Is the approximate equivalent of this on the old forum:
foo [nobbc][tt][color=blue]bar[/color][/tt][/nobbc] baz
We still had to get the nesting order right:
foo [tt][color=blue][nobbc]bar[/nobbc][/color][/tt] baz
I guess I'd like to be able to add color in an easy way anywhere, including in code tags 
A question for all on this thread: What is your use case for color?
I only have one use of it, which is to make it as clear as possible that my suggestion to disable the antivirus to see whether its interference is the cause of some odd error is to be done only:
TEMPORARILY
However, as I was writing above about having consideration for the color blind readers, I had serious doubts about whether this coloration might actually be harmful, since my understanding is that red on the background of the dark themes is actually difficult for those who are colorblind to see.