Hi Cliff,

On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Christian Soeller
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I think using clipart falls foul of the 'stock art' check that was mentioned 
> earlier, see below. I am generally unimpressed by the use of such clip'art', 
> simpler, possibly self-drawn symbols look way nicer IMHO.


Our logo has no stock art at all. It is 100% self drawn. I think it is
entirely reasonable to use stock art when we make a derivative icon
such as the download icon - i.e. grab a standard down pointing arrow.
The down arrow, the owl, or the books next to the logo are not part of
our identity. Our identity is the "pdl>" logo, and that is entirely
unique.

In fact, allow me to offer a balancing opinion: Yes, our logo should
be unique and distinctive, but other aspects of our visual design
should follow set standards where they exist. Humanity has already
agreed on various visual standards. For example:


* A "down arrow" means download.
* An owl represent knowledges, and so do books.
* On a website, the logo should be on the top-left corner and the
sidebar should e on the left.
* "FAQ" has a well-known meaning.
* etc.

These are not places where we want to be "creative" or distinctive.
Following UI standards is an important component of usability.

To be clear: I'm not saying that we must use stock art. I also know
that you never suggested breaking web standards. I just thought it was
worth pointing out that there is a place where concerns for branding
give way to concerns for following UI standards.

To give an example, I think it's entirely fine to draw our own arrow
or our own owl. But it is not fine to come up with some novel symbol
to denote download or learning.


> I just prefer a clean look but that is just me, the logo is pretty good now 
> and the icons should match that.

What do you think of the row-3 icons? Are they clean enough for you?


> Finally, we should really think about changing the prompt to 'pdl>' in 
> perldl, perldl2 and when invoked via 'pdl'.

+1 Yes! Yes! Yes!

Not only that, I think we should entirely deprecate the "perldl"
command. Even before the logo discussion I already felt strongly that
we should switch to using the "pdl" command and that the default
prompt should be "pdl>". Having the logo be "pdl>" makes the change
much more important.

Standardizing on "pdl" for the command and the prompt and the logo
would have a beautiful reinforcing effect.

-- 
Intolerant people should be shot.

_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl

Reply via email to