On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jan 3, 2012, at 3:53 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 3, 2012, at 3:16 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> OK, we got to see the new logo and a bit of a discussion has ensued re the >>>>> now Apache hosted http://www.openoffice.org/ and the existing logo on that >>>>> site. >>>>> >>>>> My question concerns the extent of "future" rebranding. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Evolution-wise, at some point we'll have a logo without the >>>> "incubating" in it. Hopefully we can slow the pace of branding changes >>>> after that ;-) >>>> >>>>> yes, it's pretty easy to just change out the logo, but should anticipate >>>>> changing out ALL occurrences of OpenOffice.org to "Apache OpenOffice" as >>>>> well? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I would not do a batch search and replace of OpenOffice.org to Apache >>>> OpenOffice. >>>> >>>> A few considerations (these are my opinions only, of course): >>>> >>>> 1) Some places legitimately should be called OpenOffice.org, e.g., >>>> references to legacy downloads, documentation for legacy releases, >>>> etc. OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 did not magically become Apache OpenOffice >>>> 3.3.0. It is still OpenOffice.org. >>>> >>>> 2) If we're discussing historical information, like the history of the >>>> project, then we would still use OpenOffice.org in that context, just >>>> as we still refer to "StarOffice". >>>> >>>> 3) I would not change something that is considered a "record", like a >>>> past communication or letter or email or press release, etc. If >>>> something was an authorized communication of the project, we should >>>> respect the words it used at the time. >>>> >>>> 4) But in general, we want to be consistent in the new branding as >>>> "Apache OpenOffice". It should be clear to a user that this is the >>>> branding and any other use should be a historical context. >>>> >>>> 5) It should be fine to refer to "Apache OpenOffice" initially on any >>>> given page and then unambiguously refer to "OpenOffice" for >>>> repetitions. We don't need to use the full form over and over and >>>> over again on the same page. But we should use the full form on the >>>> first occurrence on a page. >>>> >>>> 6) Maybe just start with the logo, the page footer and prominent other >>>> pages, e.g., the blog, top level navigation on the website, how to get >>>> involved, etc. I don't see much value in "hunting" for millions of >>>> occurrences of "OpenOffice.org". But maybe we can search for all >>>> <title> and <h1>'s that use that term? >>> >>> I just put the new Apache OpenOffice incubating logo on the project blog, >>> changing the project name. >>> >>> One possibility would be to make logo changes to the banner based on >>> whether the information is for a current release vs. information that is >>> being updated for the project. >>> >>> It would be possible to make the top logo choice at the folder level. >>> >> >> I'd avoid that approach. The logo that is on every page is part of >> the site branding. It is like the footer. It is an attribute of the >> site, not the specific page. >> >> Things that appear in the body of the page, between the header and >> footer banner, there we might have some good reasons to refer to >> OpenOffice.org, and maybe even show the old logo. But the site and >> the project are Apache OpenOffice. There should never be an occasion >> for removing the site branding from a page. >> >> Remember, someone could visit a page from an external URL reference. >> When they are dropped onto a page it should be obvious to them that >> this is the Apache OpenOffice project. It might also be obvious to >> them that they are viewing documentation for OpenOffice.org, but we >> should not need to drop the AOO branding in order for this to work. >> >>> download and api might remain with the old logo until release. >>> why would remain legacy until it is updated. >>> NLC projects could all be changed over. We want them to come to us. >>> >>> Do we want to pursue a pragmatic approach like that? >>> >> >> Consistency on site branding is pragmatic, IMHO. > > My concern is users going to download.openoffice.org and thinking that they > are downloading Apache OpenOffice when they are downloading OpenOffice.org. > > I am also concerned that when they look at API docs on api.openoffice.org for > the legacy codebase they don't think they are looking at the API for Apache > OpenOffice. >
And if they start from a page that says Apache OpenOffice and view 5 other pages that say Apache OpenOffice, and then go to a page the subtly changes the logo, then the user will also think they are downloading an Apache release -- unless you take other and much more obvious precautions. I don't think you can avoid that. A Subtle".org" in a logo is not really adequate. We should probably have a prominent note on the download there that makes it clear that this is not ALv2 code, but a legacy LGPL release. As for API doc, version to version differences are more critical than the difference between the OOo and AOO version. A developer needs to make sure they are looking at the right info, and the subtle change of logo is not going to help much. > The logo at the top is going to be subliminally the wrong message. It's a > subtle point. This is why I think we should wait to change the logo until we > are offering an Apache OpenOffice download from openoffice.org. > I'd recommend avoiding subliminal messages altogether. Have consistent branding for the site and the project, and then where there is an important distinction to make, make it clear, in writing. I think you expect too much from the visitor if you think they will take a subtle change of logo as implying something significant and specific rather than just an error. An alternative, for example, would be to have a consistently styled <div> that we could place on selected pages, saying something like "Note: the content on this page pertains specifically to the legacy OpenOffice.org release X.Y.Z. This information is subject to change when Apache OpenOffice is released". I think that addresses your concern in a better way. -Rob > Regards, > Dave > > >> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Thoughts on this? >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> MzK >>>>> >>>>> "You will always be lucky if you know how to make friends >>>>> with strange cats." >>>>> -- *Colonial American >>>>> proverb* >>> >
