The black on white, and white on black (upper left, and upper right) of the last link look really great. Hands down my favorite.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Lukasz Lenart <lukaszlen...@apache.org>wrote: > B/W version > https://copy.com/NfEV1rIUDMYf > > She started work on new webpage layout - there will be two new > templates - one for landing page and one common used for other pages. > > 2014-03-10 17:23 GMT+01:00 i...@flyingfischer.ch <i...@flyingfischer.ch>: > > I think version two, included the font used there, is nice. > > > > Version three works too, but is a little bit thick and heavy on the > > typography side. > > > > Version one may work too, if you incorporate the font in the whole > layout, > > but hit me if I am wrong: no use to choose a nice font for web layout if > the > > client has not installed it locally. > > > > I personally prefer a more reduced and serif free font. But this really > is a > > matter of taste. > > > > Great work! Thanks! Whatever you choose or will be chosen. > > > > Markus > > > > Am 10.03.2014 11:30, schrieb Lukasz Lenart: > >> > >> My favourites are two and three but I think we can have few versions > >> each with different colors. What about fonts? I would like to push > >> this further and start working on web-side layout :-) > >> > >> 2014-03-07 18:09 GMT+01:00 Chris Pratt <thechrispr...@gmail.com>: > >>> > >>> I like the third from the top the best. It has the best contrast > between > >>> the light and dark blues. > >>> (*Chris*) > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Lukasz Lenart > >>> <lukaszlen...@apache.org>wrote: > >>> > >>>> New colors https://copy.com/mewPAFa0GuQo and designer's answer: > >>>> > >>>> Several blue variants to be considered. As well as several fonts. > >>>> > >>>> I do not agree about the font - I like it very much, it is modern - > >>>> not all serifs are outdated. > >>>> > >>>> The font is called Aleo, you can read some here > >>>> http://fontfabric.com/aleo-free-font/ > >>>> > >>>> 2014-03-07 15:29 GMT+01:00 Andrew Carr <andrewlanec...@gmail.com>: > >>>>> > >>>>> I have a tattoo already. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Matthew Panetta < > matt...@panetta.id.au > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 7 Mar 2014, at 10:46 pm, Dave Newton <davelnew...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Honestly, if it comes down to it, I'm willing to throw some money > at > >>>>>>> 99designs to get it done right. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Another issue I had was the really thin whitespace lines in the > logo; > >>>>>> > >>>>>> that > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> can make some printing a bit trickier. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Because we all want t-shirts and tattoos, right? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Right? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Anyone? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sure, why not. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 6:42 AM, i...@flyingfischer.ch < > >>>>>> > >>>>>> i...@flyingfischer.ch > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Voltaire and Oswald seem to be condensed fonts, while Alegreya > Sans > >>>> > >>>> SC > >>>>>> > >>>>>> and > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Alef and others aren't. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I always feel typography is a very difficult job and needs to be > >>>> > >>>> seen in > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> the given case. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Maybe the graphic guy could make some suggestions, choosing the > >>>>>>>> appropriate kind of font for the situation? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Markus > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Am 07.03.2014 12:08, schrieb Matthew Panetta: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I like Roboto and Inconsolata. Also found Voltaire and Oswald. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> https://www.google.com/fonts#ReviewPlace:refine/Collection: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>> Alegreya+Sans+SC|Viga|Audiowide|Carrois+Gothic+SC|Alef|Roboto|Nobile| > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Inconsolata|Voltaire|Oswald< > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > https://www.google.com/fonts#ReviewPlace:refine/Collection:Alegreya+Sans+SC%7CViga%7CAudiowide%7CCarrois+Gothic+SC%7CAlef%7CRoboto%7CNobile%7CInconsolata%7CVoltaire%7COswald > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On 7 Mar 2014, at 6:05 pm, Lukasz Lenart < > lukaszlen...@apache.org> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Maybe some of these > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> https://www.google.com/fonts#ReviewPlace:refine/Collection: > >>>>>>>>>> Alegreya+Sans+SC|Flamenco|Cambo|Esteban|Audiowide| > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Carrois+Gothic+SC|Alef|Prosto+One|Varela+Round|Roboto|Nobile|Inconsolata< > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > https://www.google.com/fonts#ReviewPlace:refine/Collection:Alegreya+Sans+SC%7CFlamenco%7CCambo%7CEsteban%7CAudiowide%7CCarrois+Gothic+SC%7CAlef%7CProsto+One%7CVarela+Round%7CRoboto%7CNobile%7CInconsolata > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 2014-03-07 7:47 GMT+01:00 Matthew Panetta < > matt...@panetta.id.au>: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> My thoughts exactly. Needs a different font. > >>>>>>>>>>> On 07/03/2014 5:41 pm, "i...@flyingfischer.ch" < > >>>>>> > >>>>>> i...@flyingfischer.ch> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The Logo looks nice. Has a slight reference to the art work of > >>>> > >>>> M.C. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Escher. Great work. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Blue is always nice ;-) > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> The typography however gives the whole logo a not too modern > >>>> > >>>> touch, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> because it uses letters with serifs. I wonder if this will > match > >>>>>> > >>>>>> nicely > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> with the serif free home page of struts 2? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards > >>>>>>>>>>>> Markus Fischer > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Am 07.03.2014 06:50, schrieb Lukasz Lenart: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Link if attachment is missing > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://copy.com/MXrnIYz8KajY > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-03-07 0:01 GMT+01:00 Chris Pratt < > thechrispr...@gmail.com > >>>>> > >>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I must have missed it, I don't see anything?? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (*Chris*) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Lukasz Lenart < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lukaszlen...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Work continues, 3rd version of logo, wdyt? I think dark-blue > >>>>>> > >>>>>> version > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be also nice. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013-11-26 8:59 GMT+01:00 Lukasz Lenart < > >>>> > >>>> lukaszlen...@apache.org > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have passed your comment to designer - anyway we have > time > >>>> > >>>> and > >>>>>> > >>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can always start over when the first logo won't be good > >>>> > >>>> enough > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ;-) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reagrds > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Łukasz > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/11/24 Rene Gielen <rene.gie...@gmail.com>: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 20.11.13 14:52, schrieb Christian Grobmeier: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12 Nov 2013, at 16:51, Lukasz Lenart wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/11/12 Cameron Morris <cmor...@part.net>: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I love the look of steampunk and rickety old bridges, > but > >>>> > >>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sends > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the wrong message for a project fighting the > perception > >>>> > >>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> old > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legacy. I'd say the more modern looking the better. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> some > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more modern bridges look so space age it might be hard > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>> > >>>>>> tell > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are bridges if they are made into a small icon. Perhaps > some > >>>> > >>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might spark an idea: http://www.flickr.com/search/? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> q=modern%20bridge > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hmm... you know everything new someday will be old > anyway > >>>> > >>>> ;-) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rather say let's focus on having cool logo and not the > >>>>>> > >>>>>> message > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sends ;-) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 on the cool logo NOW instead of wasting more time. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Its always funny with us devs. We have a crap logo for > >>>> > >>>> years. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Somebody shows up and contributes a fantastic logo > >>>> > >>>> (compared > >>>>>> > >>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other one). > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suddenly all devs become designers and social media > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communicators. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are right with our out-of-style old logo, and that > >>>> > >>>> things > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change here. But why exactly are we in such a hurry? > Going > >>>> > >>>> too > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> long > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an old logo does not mean that a new logo should replace > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>> > >>>>>> old > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon as it is just "better". IMHO we would want to > replace > >>>> > >>>> it > >>>>>> > >>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something that satisfies us for years. It should be cool > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> catchy > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and in five years. "Fantastic compared to the other one" > is > >>>> > >>>> IMO > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough. Do we want old-time users to be surprised to find > >>>>>> > >>>>>> better > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logo > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now, or do we want anyone stumbling over our site or a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zeroturnaround > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> web frameworks survey to think "hey man, nice logo!"? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not a social media designer, and for that reason I > need > >>>> > >>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interact > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with a designer. I need inspiration and suggestions to > >>>>>> > >>>>>> formulate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which directions to go for the next iteration. Since I'm > >>>> > >>>> not a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designer, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm for sure too lame with my own cool logo proposal. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Over all the years I was involved with design tasks, I've > >>>> > >>>> seen > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> design > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emerge after some iterations in a process similar to > what I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outlined > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> above. I have never ever experienced being given a first > >>>>>> > >>>>>> proposal > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> makes it directly to production. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Personally I am super-happy that we have such a great > >>>> > >>>> proposal. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And if we don't have another option (one of us devs IS a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designer AND > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does some work) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we should definitely consider it. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm super happy with the work being done, and I like > some > >>>> > >>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ideas > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incorporated in the first proposals. I like the fact that > >>>>>> > >>>>>> someone > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up and is kind enough to donate work and creativity, and > I > >>>> > >>>> am > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> super > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thankful for that - and, to be honest, it makes me bit > shy > >>>> > >>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much criticism, especially since it is not my > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> profession > >>>>>> > >>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actual > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work is all about. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I went back and forth many times the last two weeks to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think > >>>>>> > >>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> re-think if I like the logo, how it might be seen, and > what > >>>>>> > >>>>>> well > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> founded > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> criticism I could give. In my review I tried to both > >>>>>> > >>>>>> incorporate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as a non-professional know about design, as well as what > I > >>>> > >>>> as a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "professional design recipient" (read: consumer) feel > when > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>> > >>>>>> see > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logo. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some of my thoughts: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Most common to me seems a combination of a dedicated logo > >>>> > >>>> icon > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clean writing for the brand, or just an elaborate writing > >>>>>> > >>>>>> without > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logo > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> icon. From time to time you see some font gimmickry to > make > >>>> > >>>> a > >>>>>> > >>>>>> pure > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> writing recognizable. But I have failed so far to come up > >>>> > >>>> with > >>>>>> > >>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a iconified design building a writing and a font > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> design. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have a look at those two sites (scroll to bottom on both) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://devoxx.be/#/sponsors > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.gopivotal.com/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There a good bunch of logos, both of companies and open > >>>> > >>>> source > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> projects, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that look cool, clean and modern, yet timeless. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you want to follow newest hipster logo trends, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://gruntjs.com/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be a source for inspiration. Nevertheless, this > seems > >>>> > >>>> to > >>>>>> > >>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much on the timeless side... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That said and reviewed many times during last week, I'm > >>>> > >>>> more in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> favor > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the combination of an icon symbol combined with with > a > >>>>>> > >>>>>> clean > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> modern typographic font for the brand name Struts. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stepping back a bit when viewing the proposed designs, > what > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strikes me > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most is that iconified graphic elements are used to > >>>> > >>>> construct a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> font. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How does this font look like? It does not seem to follow > >>>> > >>>> all of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> established rules for font design. If you color it > >>>> > >>>> completely > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> black > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the outline and reduce it to the font shape, it does not > >>>> > >>>> look > >>>>>> > >>>>>> like > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "clean" typography, even a bit clunky. But besides (or > even > >>>>>> > >>>>>> more > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than?) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> graphical details and tasteful colouring, the shape makes > >>>> > >>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impression to a viewer. I doubt that it is a good idea to > >>>> > >>>> bind > >>>>>> > >>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> font > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of a writing to iconified graphics as building > >>>> > >>>> blocks, as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limits how elaborate the typographic shape itself will > look > >>>>>> > >>>>>> like. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Designing a font is a science by itself, you can find > tons > >>>> > >>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information on the web. Just for some reading giving an > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impression: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://designshack.net/articles/typography/8-rules- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for-creating-effective-typography/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for me, this breaks down to: I have tried to like it, > but > >>>> > >>>> - > >>>>>> > >>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposed so far - I don't. This is my honest personal > view. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> And I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org > >
