[boost] Re: Logo comments

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-08 21:35:40

Aleksey,

Let me reiterate that I meant no offense by by comments; in fact, I found it to
be one of the better logos (if the slogans were removed).

Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> Jonathan Turkanis writes:
>> 92 - The captions "Plug it in", "Pieces that fit," etc. make the
>> logos look cluttered; otherwise they look pretty good. However, I
>> don't buy the explanation that the logo "at first appears to be a
>> jigsaw puzzle piece" but can also be seen as people talking around a
>> table:
>>
>> - no one will know that this is the intended interpretation unless
>> they are told. Even if someone notices the alternate interpretation,
>> there's no clue that this is intended
>
> What's the clue in case of the FedEx's arrow?

I guess your point is the logo is okay even if it only appears to be a puzzle
piece? I've no problem with that; I just meant to point out that the secondary
association you describe won't have much effect on people viewing the logo in
isolation.

>> - the logo will *always* appear to be a puzzle piece; at best it
>> will *also* appear to be people sitting around a table.
>
> Sure.
>
>> The problem with this is that "finding a piece of the puzzle" is one
>> of the most overworked metaphors in English. (I don't know if this
>> is true in other languages.)
>
> It's not the metaphors of the logo, though. The puzzle piece is simply
> a symbolic representation of a pluggable software component.

Unfortunately, "finding a piece of the puzzle" (to me) has the stronger
association with puzzle pieces. The other explanation, which is perfectly
reasonable, has to be explained. I guess that was the point of the slogans which
I didn't like.

> If that
> sounds plain, then it's a symbolic representation of a pluggable
> software component born in discussions at the table that is also the
> component itself ;).

Jonathan