I agree the logo is great, but not as an attribution mark.
To me, the most important thing in the actual attribution is '& contributors'
We should keep the text.
Yves
----- Reply message -----
De : "Marc Regan" <[email protected]>
Pour : <[email protected]>
Objet : [OSM-talk] RFC updated: OSM Attribution Mark (was: contributor mark)
Date : mer., avr. 24, 2013 17:54
Both the new mark and the copyright page look very slick. Clean, friendly,
inviting. Great work!
-- Marc ReganCofounder, Mapkin
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Kathleen Danielson wrote:However, as there has been generally positive feedback
for thedesign of this attribution mark, would it make sense to move forward
with using the attribution mark (since it addresses an immediate problem)
Definitely. The perfect is the enemy of the good, and all that. If you waitfor
100% consensus on talk@ you'll never get anything done. And, as ever,stuff can
be fine-tuned after initial deployment.
cheersRichard
--View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/RFC-updated-OSM-Attribution-Mark-was-contributor-mark-tp5758043p5758370.htmlSent
from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________talk mailing
[email protected]http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
