On 16 November 2011 13:35, Boudewijn Rempt <b...@valdyas.org> wrote: >> But they do for Qt which has even more formal rules. Where do you see >> the enforcement? The guidelines are for exactly opposite reason: to >> limit risk of (usually unintentional) fork of visual identity. >> >> Sometimes rules have to be explicit in this unfriendly world, if not >> formally then via explicit guidelines. >> I am OK with you not happy with this document but it's clear that it >> has one of the simplest form within communities. > > Well, both KDE and Debian are much simpler. I would like to be as close as > possible to KDE with our "rules", if not exactly the same. >
In reality KDE rules have no very cental page but is not as simple as it seems to be: - http://kde.org/stuff/clipart.php - http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Guidelines/CIG/KDE_Logo (and this is an outdated crystal logo, reported weeks ago) No guidelines means upside down logos for KDE is equally ok as the default ones. And I wouldn't promote or even use this a sign if we do not show we care about that. It's better not to define anything. Google for 'kde logo' images. 99% of that looks like broken identity to me. Almost as bad as overusing of blue. We also made so much anti-promotion ourselves by creating the random splash screens. I am afraid of comparing that to GNOME. I have no problem with distorted calligra artwork as long as this is not no longer reference to Calligra project. Creativeness is of lower priority than visual identity to me. There's nothing really wrong with more explicit message that that we wish to maintain our visual identity. In some countries, especially the USA, public appearance of nonprofits, usually foundations, is much more like of companies (in good sense), see Linux Foundation, Mozilla, GNOME (http://foundation.gnome.org/licensing/index.html). In my opinion we and KDE general are work in progress compared to that. I have not seen single complaint that authors cannot be creative because visual guidelines are defined for the above entities. We're not foundation so we're only talking about guidelines and not complicated trademark rules. Obviously we'll need a vote. >> Compare to >> - Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Logo/UsageGuidelines >> - openSUSE: http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines > > Distributions have their own set of legal issues they need to take care of. > >> - finally, LibreOffice http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Branding > > That one is nice (even though they are pretty stupid in specifiying cmyk > values, on their own those are meaningless). We have CMYK BLACK/WHITE so we're done, good for someone who printed in color and failed... > They don't talk about not allowing people to make merchandise unless they are > libreoffice developers, for instance. The whole page has a way more open, > community-oriented feel than the proposed guidelines for Calligra, which feel > extremely corporate to me. > OK but we do not have this (Debian's) restriction already after we agreed to do so yesterday. The link at http://community.kde.org/Calligra/Logos#Guidelines points to draft 2, I blogged about this last night. -- regards / pozdrawiam, Jaroslaw Staniek http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek Kexi & Calligra (kexi-project.org, identi.ca/kexi, calligra-suite.org) KDE Software Development Platform on MS Windows (windows.kde.org) _______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
