Re: New logo guidelines and web design elements posted

[chasd]

>  From: M?ir?n Duffy <duffy(a)redhat.com&gt; 
>  Actually, this is *not* true with respect to what Hugo is suggesting.
>
>  For example:
>
>  http://www.rpi.edu/dept/NewsComm/graphics/downloads/pdfs/toolkit.pdf 
Very descriptive document.

>  Look at pages 8 & 9 of the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute brand
>
>  book. A
>  university is a large organization made up of many sub-organizations - 
>  schools,
>  departments, research labs, etc. RPI's brand guidelines (as most 
>  universities'
>  and large corporations') recognize that they must apply to many 
>  disparate
>  sub-organizations that share the same 'brand' and have guidelines for
>  incorparating the use of their logo for those sub-organizations. 
This can be handled in a way where the sub-organization's identity is 
associated with the main brand, bit not integrated with the logo. It 
depends how close the affiliation of the sub-organization is to the 
main organization.

>  This concept of 'sub-logo' guidelines actually not that
> uncommon in 
>  brand
>  design, and it would be nice if such sub-logo guidelines could be 
>  specified for
>  Fedora's logo. 
True. If desired, guidelines on how to handle such cases should be 
integrated into the usage document, like the one for rpi.edu mentioned 
above. This puts a larger load on someone within the Fedora Project to 
keep tabs on a larger array of logos, and have new logos created or 
approved as the Fedora Project grows. Without a dedicated logo cop 
within the Fedora Project, I think the simplicity of the current usage 
document keeps the overhead of maintaining the Fedora visual identity 
at a minimum. That is a benefit to the Fedora Community from my point 
of view.

I agree with your point, but I ask how much additional value does the 
Fedora Project get out of these additional logos, verses establishing 
an identity link for sub-organizations without changing the established 
usage guidelines ?


Charles Dostale
System Admin - Silver Oaks Communications
http://www.silveroaks.com/
824 17th Street, Moline  IL  61265

New logo guidelines and web design elements posted

[Máirín Duffy]

chasd(a)silveroaks.com wrote:
> > Look at pages 8 & 9 of the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
> brand book. A
> > university is a large organization made up of many sub-organizations - 
> > schools,
> > departments, research labs, etc. RPI's brand guidelines (as most 
> > universities'
> > and large corporations') recognize that they must apply to many disparate
> > sub-organizations that share the same 'brand' and have guidelines for
> > incorparating the use of their logo for those sub-organizations.
>  
>  
>  This can be handled in a way where the sub-organization's identity is 
>  associated with the main brand, bit not integrated with the logo.  
? Care to give an example or even a sketch? I'm not sure how you could handle 
that in the way that you describe. It seems like having guidelines such as in 
the RPI usage guidelines would be the easiest way to do this.

My argument here is that the clearspace is too restrictive and that the logo 
guidelines should make exceptions for 'sub-logos.' You don't want people to be

able to position the logo that closely to another element *unless* that element 
together with the logo forms a sub-logo. Part of the guideline for 'sub-logos' 
should indicate what type of organizations are authorized to create a sub-logo 
affiliated with Fedora, and an approval process should be put into place as well 
before people can use the sub-logos.

As has been noted earlier in this thread, the Fedora Wiki mockup [1], designed 
by Capstrat themselves (who designed the Fedora logo), violates the clearspace 
set in the guidelines with the Fedora wiki logo in the upper left corner. This 
speaks to how the clearspace guidelines *should* allow for other elements to be 
placed closer to the logo in special cases.

It
>  depends how close the affiliation of the sub-organization is to the
> main 
>  organization.
>  
> > This concept of 'sub-logo' guidelines actually not that uncommon in brand
> > design, and it would be nice if such sub-logo guidelines could be 
> > specified for
> > Fedora's logo.
>  
>  
>  True. If desired, guidelines on how to handle such cases should be 
>  integrated into the usage document, like the one for rpi.edu mentioned 
>  above. This puts a larger load on someone within the Fedora Project to 
>  keep tabs on a larger array of logos, and have new logos created or 
>  approved as the Fedora Project grows. Without a dedicated logo cop 
>  within the Fedora Project, I think the simplicity of the current usage 
>  document keeps the overhead of maintaining the Fedora visual identity at 
>  a minimum. That is a benefit to the Fedora Community from my point of view. 
Well, considering there is already an approval process for the use of the logo 
which this would fit under, it really isn't putting any extra load that we 
haven't already signed up for.... *any* usage of the logo already has to be 
reported to & approved by [e-mail]... the dedicated 'logo cop'
:)

>  I agree with your point, but I ask how much additional value does the
>
>  Fedora Project get out of these additional logos, verses establishing an 
>  identity link for sub-organizations without changing the established 
>  usage guidelines ? 
You keep saying that it's possible for sub-orgs to identify with the Fedora 
project in their logos without changing the established usage guidelines, but 
you don't explain how that is possible. I'd love to hear your thoughts.


[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/WikiElements

~m