Re: "modern" colors Re: Changes for emacs 28

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   Alfred M. Szmidt <ams@gnu.org> writes:

   > Thank you, but I am not entierly sure what I am looking at -- the
   > Emacs you are showing is not from 1985.  What does the percentage
   > mean?

   Ah yes, a bit remiss of me not to state the format for my lablings:

    Editor --- Year of initial release (Stackoverflow 2019 survey, editor 
popularity)
    Screenshot of editor with default theme (trying for current)

Why is the initial release important?

   > All of those look similar to me, other than black/light background
   > when it comes to color selection.  There is I think very little
   > commonality between the edtiors in general in what they show.

   There are indeed many commonalities. However there are a few that Emacs
   doesn't share --- namely: dark default, bluey tones, line numbers, and a
   status bar that matches the background (in terms of background colour).
   Hmm, and also iconography on the status bar.

You are getting quite concrete -- you say "bluey tones" and how colors
match each other.  What does bluey tones mean?  Do you have a
suggestin how the mode-line could match the background better?

Dark vs. light default is not interesting, since I would assume that
the light theme would also have a "modern" appeal for users.

   >    * Basic editor theme comparison
   >
   > Emacs doeesn't seem to be listed?

   No, as I took your question to be "what are other editors doing?".
   Is this correct?

My question was what color and possibly font (to keep the list of
things small) differences exist between emacs and what some consider
modern coloring.

   I hope that helps,

Thank you, it does.  

   p.s. for another weighting, I could also ask some friends (Under-25,
   non-Emacsers) to rank these sample screenshots by aesthetic appeal. Just
   a thought.

I do not think such a metric would be useful, since it is so
subjective and very generic.  What would be useful is them pointing
out exactly what they think is "ugly" or "outdated" for a lack of
term.