[advocacy] Oh, no, logos again.

[Daniel James]

> They can be printed easely on two colors

This is actually really important - one colour, even. If you compare 
the old and new Apple logos, or the those of the BBC, you'll see that 
both organisations have moved from multicoloured to monochrome logos. 
It saves a ton of money when it comes to printing. In fact, the old 
Apple logo was held up as an example of 'how to get it wrong' by 
print buyers.

As much as I like the fish, it doesn't actually tell you anything you 
need to know about Ogg, and the thor/hammer/snake logo is way too 
cryptic.  Check out a typical DVD player (seemingly the convergence 
device for digital formats now) and you'll see a dozen logos 
indicating support for various formats, printed in black and no more 
than a few millimetres high. If you want to see Ogg on there, it will 
have to be a similar, simple logo. 

As for Miguel's designs, I think they show promise. One thing I have 
to say though, is that some people will read 099 instead of ogg - it 
should be a more obvious 'g'. Maybe if a free software font could be 
used throughout, that would avoid sublicensing problems too.

Cheers

Daniel
--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'advocacy-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.