Funny, I don't like [P] at all. [H] is still my favorite, I'm afraid, though I agree with Karl that it is too complex. The Klein bottle variants have a late-1970s hand-drawn flavor, which is fine but perhaps not appropriate for a computational package in the 2010s. [X] got a chuckle from me. I like the idea of incorporating a camel and an iconic scientific image, even if we have to get permission from O'Reilly (I'm sure they would grant it). I like the Moebius strip in [w], though the smile and eyeball need some work or could maybe be omitted entirely (a la [R] or [T] with a Moebius strip instead of their respective ancillary icons).
Daniel, it is awesome that you are willing to put yourself in the line of fire like this. On Jul 17, 2010, at 3:07 AM, Stefan Evert wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > great work on the logos! Are we voting for our favourites now? And > do people like me who are _almost_ PDL users (but never quite got > round to it) get a vote too? > > My favourite is the simple logo [P] -- distinctive, quite elegant > and works as an icon, too. [R] or [S] could be used for large icons > e.g. on the entry page of the Web site. In this case, I have a > slight preference for the camel in [S], wearing the typical relaxed > and satisfied smile of a PDL user. :) > > [U] might also work with some tweaking, but unlike [P] it isn't > easily recognised by colour or shape. > > >>> 1. It should not infringe on any existing mark. Use of a camel in >>> conjunction with Perl is a protected trademark of O'Reilly. So, >>> right >>> of that bat, all images that use a camel are out. >> >> I disagree. First, O'Reilly is very flexible with the use of the >> camel >> symbol in connection to Perl. Second, I doubt that they automatically >> have the rights to every possible quadruped (the camel silhouette >> I've >> used is different from the drawing in "Programming Perl"). > > I'm quite sure that the use of any camel would infringe O'Reilly's > trademark rights -- remember how Apple was sued by Apple Records, > even before they entered the music market? This kind of trademark > protection is usually not about a specific design, but about a > concept (such as an apple or a camel) associated with a product. > > So you'd probably have to get permission from O'Reilly to use a > camel as part of the PDL logo, but I understand they normally don't > refuse such requests (esp. from non-profit projects). No a priori > argument against logos involving camels, therefore. > > Best, > Stefan > > > _______________________________________________ > Perldl mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl > _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
