# Not treating colors as descriptive states of graphs

**URL:** <https://forum.beeminder.com/t/not-treating-colors-as-descriptive-states-of-graphs/6693>\
**Category:** Akrasia\
**Created:** [May 6, 2020, 11:42pm UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/not-treating-colors-as-descriptive-states-of-graphs/6693 "2020-05-06T23:42:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![zedmango](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c67d28/32.png) [@zedmango](https://forum.beeminder.com/u/zedmango)\
**Post date:** [May 7, 2020, 12:43am UTC](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/not-treating-colors-as-descriptive-states-of-graphs/6693/3 "2020-05-07T00:43:39Z")

</div>

I don’t understand what’s wrong with colors - we are still going to color-code goals, right? Or are the colors going away?

If the colors are staying, I think people will still be referring to goal states by colors - it’d be hard not to.

So we have the colors, and we have the number of days - why are additional names needed?

I appreciate wanting to accomodate color-blind users, but I don’t see how avoiding the color _names_ is helpful for that if we’re still keeping the colors themselves.

And there are better solutions for dealing with color-blindness than “avoid color” - one possibility is to allow colors to be custom-configurable, so users could select a color scheme they could easily visually distinguish. (see [my feature request](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/feature-request-color-ratchet/4851))

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.beeminder.com/t/not-treating-colors-as-descriptive-states-of-graphs/6693)._