Subject: Re: [boost] [logo] Boost logo variants for use in unofficial or unreleased boost documentation - was C++ Networking Library Release 0.5
From: Thomas Klimpel (Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-31 06:56:23
Patrick Horgan wrote:
> Please review http://dbp-consulting.com/boostvariantslogo.html
The "Accepted For" and "Proposed For" logos are very good. Both nicely take into account the current formal review practices :-)
The style of the "powered by" and "using" logos is probably not appropriate for their intended usage. The logos are too large, and the "powered by"/"using" should not be in red.
The "designed for" and "under construction" logos are unclear. The intention of the logo would be to make clear the relation to boost. But "under construction" is a statement about the library itself, and "designed for" may be a statement, but not a clear one.
Wasn't there a "rejected proposal for" logo? I guess it was dropped for the same reason that "under construction for" was renamed to "under construction". How about "in preparation for" and "rejected by"? These would at least make a statement about the relation to boost.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk