Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C4990BC3-6874-4670-A2B7-A19AD0C2767B@comcast.net>
References: 
 <CAGj3216HEKfsA=SRcjPzxEZmx5ofEYDM3E4vo-=05mu4gmHjZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAP-ksoizKXugwUCpW2dAn0_YakzX05+fytsGiLg7ZmZ4KbuqJg@mail.gmail.com>
	<C4990BC3-6874-4670-A2B7-A19AD0C2767B@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 18:53:15 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAP-ksogk_hhmkDCW5pvTU++1bEAyj7vUdhBSo359mYf7RQMeHw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WWW] rebranding...
From: Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Jan 3, 2012, at 3:16 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> OK, we got to see the new logo and a bit of a discussion has ensued re =
the
>>> now Apache hosted http://www.openoffice.org/ and the existing logo on t=
hat
>>> site.
>>>
>>> My question concerns the extent of "future" rebranding.
>>>
>>
>> Evolution-wise, at some point we'll have a logo without the
>> "incubating" in it. Hopefully we can slow the pace of branding changes
>> after that ;-)
>>
>>> yes, it's pretty easy to just change out the logo, but should anticipat=
e
>>> changing out ALL occurrences of OpenOffice.org to "Apache OpenOffice" a=
s
>>> well?
>>>
>>
>> I would not do a batch search and replace of OpenOffice.org to Apache
>> OpenOffice.
>>
>> A few considerations (these are my opinions only, of course):
>>
>> 1) Some places legitimately should be called OpenOffice.org, e.g.,
>> references to legacy downloads, documentation for legacy releases,
>> etc. =C2=A0 OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 did not magically become Apache OpenOff=
ice
>> 3.3.0. =C2=A0It is still OpenOffice.org.
>>
>> 2) If we're discussing historical information, like the history of the
>> project, then we would still use OpenOffice.org in that context, just
>> as we still refer to "StarOffice".
>>
>> 3) I would not change something that is considered a "record", like a
>> past communication or letter or email or press release, etc. =C2=A0If
>> something was an authorized communication of the project, we should
>> respect the words it used at the time.
>>
>> 4) But in general, we want to be consistent in the new branding as
>> "Apache OpenOffice". =C2=A0 It should be clear to a user that this is th=
e
>> branding and any other use should be a historical context.
>>
>> 5) It should be fine to refer to "Apache OpenOffice" initially on any
>> given page and then unambiguously refer to "OpenOffice" for
>> repetitions. =C2=A0We don't need to use the full form over and over and
>> over again on the same page. =C2=A0But we should use the full form on th=
e
>> first occurrence on a page.
>>
>> 6) Maybe just start with the logo, the page footer and prominent other
>> pages, e.g., the blog, top level navigation on the website, how to get
>> involved, etc. =C2=A0I don't see much value in "hunting" for millions of
>> occurrences of "OpenOffice.org". =C2=A0But maybe we can search for all
>> <title> and <h1>'s that use that term?
>
> I just put the new Apache OpenOffice incubating logo on the project blog,=
 changing the project name.
>
> One possibility would be to make logo changes to the banner based on whet=
her the information is for a current release vs. information that is being =
updated for the project.
>
> It would be possible to make the top logo choice at the folder level.
>

I'd avoid that approach.  The logo that is on every page is part of
the site branding.  It is like the footer.  It is an attribute of the
site, not the specific page.

Things that appear in the body of the page, between the header and
footer banner, there we might have some good reasons to refer to
OpenOffice.org, and maybe even show the old logo.  But the site and
the project are Apache OpenOffice.  There should never be an occasion
for removing the site branding from a page.

Remember, someone could visit a page from an external URL reference.
When they are dropped onto a page it should be obvious to them that
this is the Apache OpenOffice project.  It might also be obvious to
them that they are viewing documentation for OpenOffice.org, but we
should not need to drop the AOO branding in order for this to work.

> download and api might remain with the old logo until release.
> why would remain legacy until it is updated.
> NLC projects could all be changed over. We want them to come to us.
>
> Do we want to pursue a pragmatic approach like that?
>

Consistency on site branding is pragmatic, IMHO.

> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>>
>>
>>> Thoughts on this?
>>>
>>> --
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----------------
>>> MzK
>>>
>>> "You will always be lucky if you know how to make friends
>>> =C2=A0with strange cats."
>>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0-- *Colonial American
>>> proverb*
>