Calligra Branding Presentation & Draft of Guidelines

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Wednesday 16 November 2011 Nov, Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:

> But they do for Qt which has even more formal rules. Where do you see
> the enforcement? The guidelines are for exactly opposite reason: to
> limit risk of (usually unintentional) fork of visual identity.
> 
> Sometimes rules have to be explicit in this unfriendly world, if not
> formally then via explicit guidelines.
> I am OK with you not happy with this document but it's clear that it
> has one of the simplest form within communities.

Well, both KDE and Debian are much simpler. I would like to be as close as possible to KDE with our "rules", if not exactly the same.

> 
> Compare to
> - Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Logo/UsageGuidelines
> - openSUSE: http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines

Distributions have their own set of legal issues they need to take care of.

> - finally, LibreOffice http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Branding

That one is nice (even though they are pretty stupid in specifiying cmyk values, on their own those are meaningless). They don't talk about not allowing people to make merchandise unless they are libreoffice developers, for instance. The whole page has a way more open, community-oriented feel than the proposed guidelines for Calligra, which feel extremely corporate to me.

> Really, I haven't seen forks of these visual identities caused by
> complexity of rules.
> And yet we have much simpler rules proposed. I'd like to see a way to
> end this discussion and move from here to further improvements like
> extending the brand to Calligra Engine and alike.

Well, we can setup a vote, I guess.

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt
http://www.valdyas.org, http://www.krita.org, http://www.boudewijnrempt.nl