Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-marketing-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-marketing-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 99BBC7B66 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 19:06:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 95972 invoked by uid 500); 5 Dec 2011 19:06:51 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-marketing-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 95939 invoked by uid 500); 5 Dec 2011 19:06:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-marketing-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 95931 invoked by uid 99); 5 Dec 2011 19:06:51 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 19:06:51 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: 203.97.33.64 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of g.a.lauder@gmail.com) Received: from [203.97.33.64] (HELO smtp3.clear.net.nz) (203.97.33.64) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 19:06:43 +0000 Received: from linux-54ug.localnet (218-101-79-111.dialup.clear.net.nz [218.101.79.111]) by smtp3.clear.net.nz (CLEAR Net Mail) with ESMTP id <0LVQ0040LVPFHA30@smtp3.clear.net.nz> for ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 08:06:22 +1300 (NZDT) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 02:21:33 +1300 From: Graham Lauder Subject: Re: Aoo logo draft To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org Message-id: <201112060221.33962.g.a.lauder@gmail.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: Text/Plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Sunday 04 Dec 2011 04:04:54 drew wrote: > On Sat, 2011-12-03 at 16:50 +1300, Graham Lauder wrote: > > On Friday 02 Dec 2011 21:31:45 drew wrote: > > > Howdy Eric, > > > > > > On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 08:52 +0100, eric b wrote: > > > > Apologies, I forgot : > > > > > > > > Thank you very much for your proposal > > > > > > > > > Your welcome and thanks also. > > > > > > > Instead of changing everything, I'd suggest to define a complete > > > > graphic chart ? I mean new colors, new applications logos, and so > > > > on : invite Designers, and people who have ideas to participate. > > > > > > hmm, my take on the conversation was that there was a user for a > > > graphic specific to the project and not necessarily to the product, so > > > that is what was in my head when prompted. > > > > > > So with specifics to the graphic I whipped up, one thing I'm not > > > satisfied with is the color change to the text 'Open' I'll work on that > > > later today. > > > > > > In general, I believe you are absolutely correct this project would > > > benefit from some 'real' designer(s) getting involved. (maybe this will > > > help spur some one..) > > > > > > For specific elements of the application changing, including the logo > > > used there, this proposal does not mean I think they should be changed, > > > at least not at the moment - that level of change would, IMO, best be > > > held off on till some of the above human resources speak up. > > > > > > Anyway, it's getting rather late now - will try to work on that color > > > issue after I get some sleep. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > //drew > > > > Eric is right however, first we need to define a colour pallet, font > > face, bugs and general style. Define also dimensions and proportions > > and white space for the various use cases. (print, web, promotional gear > > etc) This should all be laid out in a style guide. Any fonts used > > should be available under appropriate licenses as well. > > Howdy Graham, eric, others, > > I do understand and agree with the concerns, but the fact remains that > there is a need at this moment for a logo specific to _this_ project. > > My best attempt was made to create new artwork which conforms to the > design principles as described in the OpenOffice.org branding guidelines > documentation. > > This is one of the reasons I've avoided commenting on calls for mascots, > feathers and the like, though I did put up an example which included an > example which did expand the color space, yesterday. > > Today I've uploaded the actual proposal files, found as before on the > AOO community wiki at: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal > > Please note that I've added information on the M+ font family used to > generate the source image. > http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Branding_Initiative/branding_guide > lines_draft > > I believe the font license poses no barriers to use in this project, and > English version of the license can be found here: > http://mplus-fonts.sourceforge.jp/mplus-outline-fonts/index-en.html#license > > I am happy to answer questions on the work and respond to > concerns/requests, particularly as regards seamlessly fitting into the > current branding of existing artwork. > > Thanks for your interest and feedback, > > //drew My feeling at this point is that it would be preferable to start as we mean to go on. As has been pointed out to me on numerous occasions this is not the old OOo project. True, we are in incubating and not yet a TLP, however it seems that we should be marketing the project as if we were, so that it can be seen what we look like once we do become a TLP. Therefore I think we need to look at the branding with a long term perspective. Whatever release is put out by this podling, from now on will be an Apache release under Apache license and branding should reflect that. The name isn't a hell of a lot different, other than the Apache lead, so the new brand needs to reflect that this is a new beginning for a new project that just happens to be based on the old OOo code that retains some of the old name. The old logo and branding is now past tense we need a reboot to see us into the future. Retaining the old branding or even something like it simply reinforces the view that the project stuttered and stopped and is now staggering back to life but is now way back down the track with the "competition" having continued at full pace. We are in the situation now, given the time lapse, of being seen as irrelevant. The only way to counter that is to come back to the market refreshed and announcing to the world that we are still with the frontrunners by being bold and brazen with good code, innovative features and a bold new look. This is the only chance we will have to do this, once we're back in people's consciousness any changes to the branding will have to be incremental and small. Cheers GL PS: Normally I despise "Brand Competitions" with a decision by vote and I still do. However a Competition may be the best bet at this juncture, however we need to use marketing best practice here. If we decide on a competition my suggestion is to get the community (Dev list) vote down to top five by transferable vote or we have consensus. Those people in the community who wish to be involved in marketing (this list) then remove two more by consensus. Then all of those people take the remaining three variations and survey end users in good old fashioned market research. The other option is the Apache way, "Those that do the work make the decision." Those on this list create the branding elements and we work it over until we have a consensus. PPS: Obviously contributors will need to have signed an ICLA to have artwork considered. G