On Apr 13, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Guillaume Lerouge wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 00:41, Ludovic Dubost <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> +1 for 4A >> >> and I'm at this point very -1 on 16 because of the W which has a missing >> arm.. >> I can't read XWiki in it.. >> > > I'd like to react about this: at this stage I share Ludovic's feeling. I had > people from outside the project look at the 16 logo and they weren't able to > read "XWiki" in it. I'm afraid that while stylistically interesting, this > logo is too unreadable for mainstream use - unless we don't expect anyone to > understand the XWiki logo that is. > > I'm feeling pretty close to giving it a -1 too if its readability isn't > improved. I know I might be going against the flow here but we're about to > make a significant choice here and I don't want us to regret it. > > Any thoughts? > > Guillaume > I share your opinion... Besides the fact that I don't like it because it's miles away from the "web 2.0" style that I think we tend to. It would be good if our style was "geeky-oldschool" but I don't think it's the case. But this is a personal and questionable opinion.
The fact is that me too, at a first glance, I can't read XWiki in it and I have to make an effort in order to "see" XWiki written in that logo. My 2 cents, Fabio _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users
