13 Apr
2010
13 Apr
'10
11:41 a.m.
On Apr 13, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Guillaume Lerouge wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 00:41, Ludovic Dubost <ludovic(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
I share your opinion... Besides the fact that I don't like it because it's
miles away from the "web 2.0" style that I think we tend to.
It would be good if our style was "geeky-oldschool" but I don't think
it's the case.
But this is a personal and questionable opinion.
The fact is that me too, at a first glance, I can't read XWiki in it and I have to
make an effort in order to "see" XWiki written in that logo.
My 2 cents,
Fabio
+1 for 4A
and I'm at this point very -1 on 16 because of the W which has a missing
arm..
I can't read XWiki in it..
I'd like to react about this: at this stage I share Ludovic's feeling. I had
people from outside the project look at the 16 logo and they weren't able to
read "XWiki" in it. I'm afraid that while stylistically interesting, this
logo is too unreadable for mainstream use - unless we don't expect anyone to
understand the XWiki logo that is.
I'm feeling pretty close to giving it a -1 too if its readability isn't
improved. I know I might be going against the flow here but we're about to
make a significant choice here and I don't want us to regret it.
Any thoughts?
Guillaume