Subject: Re: [boost] [logo] Boost logo variants for use in unofficial or unreleased boost documentation
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-08 09:14:18
Paul A. Bristow wrote:
> Patrick Horgan
> So here is a draft text for starting a new thread:
> Subject: Proposal for new variants of the Boost logo.
> There are many projects springing up, often with smart
> documentation using the Boost Logo, and there are many
> more products, for sale and for free, that use Boost
I'm not sure what you're trying to say with the phrase, "smart documentation."
> Many are concerned at the 'Dilution of the Brand Identity':
> so we propose two new logos:
"With so many new projects appearing with documentation brandishing the Boost logo, as directed currently for review submissions, there is growing concern that the Boost "brand" or "identity" is being diluted. To correct that, we propose a new logo for use by libraries not yet accepted by Boost.
"Furthermore, while we have a "Using Boost" page on the web site, the Boost brand can be better advertised and established if products using Boost have a logo for indicating the use of Boost libraries and, perhaps, as a way of expressing thanks for those libraries.
"Therefore, we propose that Boost adopt two new logos. One will add the words 'for use with' to the standard logo, and the other will add the words 'powered by' to the standard logo. You can see our current ideas for those logos at http://dbp-consulting.com/boostvariantslogo.html, as created by Patrick Horgan."
> 1 For projects that use Boost and would like to acknowledge
> this - with thanks
> (in addition to the 'Using Boost' listing on the website)
> "Powered by" - logo for all projects *using* Boost.
> 2 For projects that are written with Boost 'in mind',
> perhaps for submission, but are *not yet reviewed and
> "For use with" - logo for projects having some association
> with Boost, but are *not 'official'*.
This list can now be eliminated and this additional explanation can be added:
"Projects that are written in the style of Boost libraries, perhaps with the notion of being submitted for review, shouldn't use the official logo as it signals an association that does not exist. Therefore, we propose that all projects of this sort, including libraries being proposed for inclusion in Boost, use the new 'for use with' logo.
"A fourth logo was suggested for libraries submitted for review that adds 'proposed for' to the standard logo. That logo is thought to lend additional credibility to authors that shepherd a library far enough along to be put on the review queue. However, there is concern that if such a library is reviewed and rejected, the author can choose to not further develop and resubmit the library or to carry on the library's development outside of Boost. In such cases, the 'proposed for' logo implies too much about the relationship between that library and Boost. Thus, the "for use with" logo is thought to be a safer alternative for proposed libraries.
"Notice that the 'powered by' logo uses a phrase in keeping with the word 'boost.' An earlier suggestion was 'uses,' but the current proposal makes a more powerful statement. Because there is a direct association between Boost and such libraries and applications, the phrase 'powered by' is rendered in the same blue as the rest of the logo text."
> (Many like red text to signal that this is NOT (yet) a Boost
> approved library).
"By contrast, the 'for use with' logo, which merely indicates a potential association with Boost, and is to clearly show that libraries have not been accepted by Boost, uses red text to draw the attention to the variant text. Perhaps another color or stylistic convention is more suitable, but we haven't thought of anything else."
> http://dbp-consulting.com/boostvariantslogo.html (produced
> by Patrick Hogan)
> (These will be available in bitmap, png and svg formats ready
> to be used in html and pdf docs).
"There are questions of where to put such logos in SVN, how to document their use, etc., and we must tackle those, of course, but we'd like to focus on three questions at present:
"1. Should Boost adopt new logos?
"2. Are the two proposed logos the right ones to add?
"3. Is the rendering of the new logos good?
"Please be sure to answer those three questions when replying, even if you have other thoughts or suggestions."
> OK to start a new thread?
I think we're ready to do so. I like what you started with, but I thought it could be improved a bit. I hope you like it. I'm fine with any variation of yours and mine you'd like to send.
> PS Exactly where they go and size can be decided later?
> SVG are best for pdf generation (and are embedded into the
> pdf of course).
> PNG are best for html (because IE doesn't support svg -
> shame!). html need to
> copy the pngs from Boost site so that docs can be zipped self
I purposely tried to focus attention away from such things at this point.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk