Calligra Branding Presentation & Draft of Guidelines

[C. Boemann]

I'd just like to say that, until I say otherwise, I am fully behind Jaroslaw, 
and you can count what he says as echoed by me.

On Tuesday 15 November 2011 23:04:40 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
> On 15 November 2011 08:15, Boudewijn Rempt <boud at valdyas.org> wrote:
> > On Saturday 12 November 2011 Nov, Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >> Presentation on branding we had today at the sprint:
> >> 
> >> http://community.kde.org/Calligra/Meetings/Fall_2011_meeting/Minutes#Bra
> >> nding
> >> 
> >> Please discuss here about important things like terms of use of the
> >> logo in the context of the Calligra Project (not about logo as it's
> >> already decided). The guidelines is a draft!
> > 
> > Well, on the whole, I think these guidelines are way too strict and far
> > away from the free software spirit.
> > 
> > Page 2:
> > 
> > "the product it is used for is made using a documented
> > procedures of preparing Calligra Suite software as
> > published on http://www.calligra-suite.org/distributing, "
> > 
> > s/procedures/procedure/, s/of/for/ to make it English.
> 
> Thank you for reviewing, Boud.
> Fixed, thanks.
> 
> > Why does the procedure needs to be document? I'm fine with any
> > distribution packaging Calligra, whether they document their procedure
> > or not.
> 
> That's not what I mean and I can see only now maybe it should sound like:
> 
> "the product it is used for is prepared in compliance with Calligra
> Suite Distribution Guidelines as published on
> http://www.calligra-suite.org/distributing"
> 
> Nobody should be worried because of the Distribution Guidelines -
> generic rules that all you would take for granted anyway (but it's
> easy to be surprised each time someone even unintentionally breaks the
> rules; something of this sort: using custom build flags that expose
> hidden alpha features while keeping the stable version number).
> 
> > " official approval is given by KDE e.V. for its use in this
> > purpose"
> > 
> > I don't think KDE e.V. can do that -- I think it's not the e.V.'s job to
> > decide who can use the Calligra logo when packaging Calligra for a
> > distribution. Before we can have this requirement, we need to verify
> > that with KDE e.V.
> 
> Ok, TODO: check. There is 1a) 'or' 1b) so this part can be easily
> changed or removed.
> 
> > "May be used if an official part of the Calligra Suite software
> > (decided using the rules in 1.) is part of the complete
> > product, if it is made clear that only this part is officially
> > approved and compliant with the procedures"
> > 
> > What procedures? And I don't like the "officially" here.
> 
> "2. If the Calligra Suite software or its part (decided using the
> rules in 1.) is used as a part of another complete product, this logo
> may be only used if it is made clear that it refers only to the part
> of the product derived from Calligra Suite software and not the
> complete product."
> 
> So: removed officialism and procedures (the latter is mentioned in 1.
> and that is enough).
> 
> > "Permission has been given to use the official Calligra Suite logo
> > on clothing (shirts, hats, etc) as long as they are made by a
> > Calligra developer and not sold for profit."
> > 
> > I think everyone should be free to produce t-shirts and what-not with the
> > logo and sell them, even for a profit. I'm even fine with people
> > changing the logo, like was done for the sprint t-shirt.
> 
> The selling part is added after debian (may be indeed a dead rule
> though as noted elsewhere), so OK.
> For the modification part, I have to oppose; we probably want to vote
> or something. "Us" changing the logo is not 100% the same as changing
> the logo by 3rd parties. Enforceability of the rule is another thing
> but that is all why we're talking about the document as a guideline,
> i.e. suggestion.
> 
> > Page 3:
> > 
> > "Alternatively solid white logo on solid black background can be
> > used when it better fits. The note about border apply to this case
> > too."
> > 
> > I wouldn't demand black -- it would mean the sprint t-shirts are in
> > violation :-). Any solid color should be fine, especially for
> > merchandise like t-shirts.
> 
> Of course thanks to KO for the sponsorship effort.
> Obviously I hope next time something can be done without a need for
> distorting the logo. The current t-shirts design (
> http://www.valdyas.org/~boud/calligra_2011_2_group_foto.jpg ) breaks
> most basic guideline point used in any branding based on visual
> identity. I have just not seen the t-shirt before while constructing
> the guidelines (that have no novel parts anyway, all of it is
> standard). This time artistic vision prevailed. Good thing is the
> solid white color - it's compliant :)
> 
> If it is surprising to someone I criticize things this way, look at
> all the versions of Qt t-shits. Qt logo kept intact there since it's
> #1 rule, anyone wanting to have logo and not just graphical template.
> Artists still can express their creativeness as it can be observed
> e.g. on the QtCS t-shirt ( http://twitpic.com/5cs05n/full - the Qt
> logo is used at the back, not distorted, no 'noise'). (BTW: They have
> the 'Code less...' text as optional and we can have "Engine" text or
> any other added too and published within the guidelines.
> 
> Exception for t-shirts with solid dark (or very light) background and
> contrasting colors is an option. Solid color and not, say, flower
> pattern in the background.
> 
> > Page 4:
> > 
> > "Always reproduce the complete Calligra Suite logo as the
> > electronic artwork provides. Do not alter the logo in any way. Do
> > not redesign it, redraw, animate. Do not alter the proportions of
> > the logo or rotate it or render it three dimensions. Do not use any
> > part of the logo as a decorative element, background, or pattern."
> > 
> > I'd be fine with patterns, backgrounds or using it as decoration -- why
> > not?
> 
> Because we're looking at logo, not graphics template provided for
> creating variations on the topic.
> I give an example: after first look at the sprint t-shirt (
> http://www.valdyas.org/~boud/calligra_2011_2_group_foto.jpg ) it is
> not instantly obvious it's all about Calligra, since there is no logo
> with the full clearance zone as defined by the guideline that
> separates logo from the artwork. The added pilcrow (¶) is geeky at
> first sight, it makes the t-shirt in fact sprint t-shirt, not official
> Calligra t-shirt, and that was the goal I think.
> 
> I did somehow explain why would we want to restrict ourselves - to
> introduce and maintain identity. Either we provide artwork for any
> 'creations' - then there is no logo or we build up identity helping
> creative people use it without distorting.
> 
> Please note that the language is not perfect. It may even sound as if
> there is implied threat for punishment. I have never had this in mind.
> Regarding the text, this was a start and I corrected it above thanks
> to your notes.
> Let's think about all this text as a guideline, advice and request for
> 3rdparties with assumed good will.