After enormous amount of bikesheding about colors we decided to override
ReadTheDocs default style for literals (``literal`` in the RST markup).
Justification:
- The default RTD "light red literal on white background" is hard to
read. https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/ reports that text
colored as rgb(231, 76, 60) on white background has insufficient
contrast.
- The ARM has enormous amount of literals all over the place and thus
one sentence can contain several black/red/black color changes. This
is distracting. As a consequence, the ARM looks like a Geronimo
Stilton book.
What we experimented with as replacements for red:
- Green - way too distracting
- Blue - too similar to "usual clickable link"
- Violet - too Geronimo Stilton style
- Brown - better but still distracting
After all the bikesheding we settled on black, i.e. the same as all
"normal" text. I.e. the color is now the same and literals are denoted
by monospaced font and a box around the literal. This has best contrast
and is way less distracting than it used to be.
This lead to a new problem: Internal references to "term definitions"
defined using directives like .. option:: were rendered almost the same
as literals:
- References: monospaced + box + bold + clickable
- Literals: monospaced + box To distinguish these two we added black
dotted underline to clickable references.
I hereby declare the bikeshed painted.
RTD style default never wraps <th> and <td> elements and that just does
not work for real sentences or any other long lines.
We can reconsider styling some tables separately, but at the moment we
do not have use for tables with long but unwrappable lines so it's
easier to allow wrapping globally.
