incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean Weber <>
Subject Re: [user guides] Use of AOO logo on cover of ODFAuthors user guide?
Date Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:15:08 GMT
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 21:27, Rob Weir <> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 6:03 AM, Jean Weber <> wrote:
>> Can ODFAuthors use the AOO logo on the cover of the user guides we are
>> producing to AOO?
> The relevant ASF policy is here:
> Note the preferred attribution.
>> Related question: with the license for these books being CC-BY, not
>> Apache-2, I have never been clear just what relationships these books
>> will have to AOO. I realise that they will not be considered part of
>> the official AOO product offering, but beyond that I'm not sure... are
>> they "community produced documentation" or "third party documentation"
>> or what? I know this has been talked about, but if there's been a
>> definitive statement I've apparently missed it.
> I don't think it is an either/or thing.  ODFAuthors is both 3rd party
> as well as community-produced.  It is certainly 3rd party:  It is not
> under the ALv2 license; it does not have source files in SVN;  it is
> not being voted on the PMC for release; it is not being distributed
> along with other officially released project modules.
>> Personally, I don't care what status the project decides that these
>> books can have; I just want to know what it is, so I don't
>> inadvertently do something wrong.
> Main thing is to avoid having the user be confused about the source of
> the documentation.  It is from ODFAuthors, not AOO.  So when we host
> the files on the wiki, we should make sure it is clear to the user
> where to report errors,where they can go to volunteer, who they can
> thank, etc.

OK, it looks like as a practical matter, using the logo on the cover
is out, at least for the first iteration of the Getting Started book.
We're unlikely to have time to get a cover design approved by
trademarks before the book is published -- unless Drew or someone is
even more speedy than usual at coming up with a design. No problem;
there's always next time... assuming we want the logo there at all.
IMO, it's not really necessary and could well convey to users the
incorrect idea that the book is official, regardless of what the
attribution on the copyright page says (almost no one reads copyright

I'll amend the attribution on the draft copyright page of the book;
thanks for the pointer. I should have remembered that page.


View raw message