Hi,

Any news?
If there is anything that I can help.

Regards,

Webysther

Em dom, 24 de abr de 2016 às 13:04, Hannes Magnusson <
[email protected]> escreveu:

> Nice to hear from you!
>
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Colin Viebrock <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hey all.  I actually am still around, just not active in the
> php-webmaster
> > group. :)
> >
> > A few things that I’ll point out:
> >
> > 1) The image currently displayed at
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PHP_Logo.png is most definitely
> not
> > the PHP logo.  This one
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PHP-logo.svg
> > is the official one, but it’s an earlier version (before the spacing
> between
> > the “h” and second “p” was tweaked).
> >
> > 2) Looking again, the EPS file at http://php.net/download-logos.php is
> also
> > the older version.  I can dig up the correct one and make a PR request to
> > put it on php.net.  I can make a SVG version as well and, if the current
> > webmaster team approves, I think we could remove all the alternate
> formats
> > on that page … i.e. the “powered by” badges, file icon files, GIFs and
> TIFs.
> > An SVG, a large PNG and and JPG should be enough for anyone.
> >
>
>
> That would be great!
> I think the powered by pngs are still fun, for historical reference at
> least.
> Same applies to couple of the icons.
>
>
>
> > 3) I have never “legally” transferred trademark, copyright, or ownership
> in
> > the logo to the PHP Group (as I have with the Open Source Initiative
> logo I
> > also created).  I’m happy to do so, and can even use the OSI letter their
> > lawyers drafted as a template.
>
> I think that would be awesome :)
>
>
> > 4) I’ve always operated under the assumption that usage of the PHP logo
> is
> > explained (in plain-English terms) on the website:
> > - if you want to make money from putting the logo on merchandise, contact
> > [email protected]
> > - for any other use, you can use it as you wish as long as you aren’t
> > suggesting that the PHP group isn’t endorsing your product/service, etc.
>
>
> I think the only problem with this is that its understandable for
> case-by-case use, but not for a website, like wikipedia, which would
> prefer to put the logo into one of the license bins. Its far easier to
> say "all logos on this website are licensed under blablabla" then it
> is to hunt for all grammatical differences.
>
> As for the merchandise clause, it isn't realistic. We've never gone
> after any of the merchants, and I don't think any of them ever asked.
> The previous email that was listed, [email protected] didn't even work for
> the longest time :)
>
> This has worked for about 20years now, so I think its fine though :]
>
> -Hannes
>
-- 
*Webysther Nunes*

Reply via email to