From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.text.pandoc/24258 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: JM Marcastel Newsgroups: gmane.text.pandoc Subject: Re: RFC: Designing Logo of Pandoc Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:42:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: Reply-To: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_2238_1549345987.1579686157676" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="44297"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: pandoc-discuss Original-X-From: pandoc-discuss+bncBDWYDFOBVUFRBDVSUDYQKGQEB2C4RMY-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Wed Jan 22 10:42:41 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: gtp-pandoc-discuss@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from mail-oi1-f184.google.com ([209.85.167.184]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1iuCX3-000BTj-GS for gtp-pandoc-discuss@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 10:42:41 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-oi1-f184.google.com with SMTP id a124sf2392815oii.17 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:42:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=Ps0v0j++vcoOdBIy/ms9MKqk47L/8bn5q5qPIM14wMg=; b=EYL2n85d/4uu9CEbgHIn1+RFX3NILTpgFpEnTFlSUPHyTJb/G6BlY3mKBGTl14MWet dwniIX4nk8xl+gS48oDy3kkXBwGxfahdS2KM8pKiGL23NAMr6YHYuzHC3Bkl0htRWdBp zoZHBmDTv+aK9KZWHDgfHSYts/z7hMCwxW2SQPKFLaQRX01MktsL9cgWCjvNW3u6dvMq ht4iO2fDyuS96EO9G4Kfk6VWPacro5BYI7A4O2sNVoTe0z0qdO0vgo6rNVi7dK+0PgTD 3UeYHkcrMr+zAKrglmPrYKb+qj26i+TS84piyg48CUwHX4BKx0VEzfyWrDg6QfiOxEk4 nuDw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=sender:x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=Ps0v0j++vcoOdBIy/ms9MKqk47L/8bn5q5qPIM14wMg=; b=AFf6at4j+zkd/eFFBWB0385qGOvptpTojgJHEAwt6ONgqsgeXb1Wd9824FtClMvv6i axNz5Y8/tLwqdWDcqOCCBgG/Bj6eESthiN0kaX2Iyysunbr5/G1fePPhfj5v+dre5B3i AYjtOJK5OyiJ2dIHf0rR93wWbavMDVOzdDE5+1YcNLyjHrW1hZxI9NALlmEWu4N5C/Uq tw2THKyWmFgNJBp1A/yjo6Z22+Eao0TqsNKM78XVsSUEGytFrWmqpf5D2fsLBWUydyDK 1BE1kFP6sFEyk62McYE0SoTUCvdMCcz17xXFrh0BfYBm8UfR8fLQC8c2hsiWIm5g/mBr K8fA== Original-Sender: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVlG68SLCpqw8dKav1V0t5BYCMkPDYI5CiJhhYAEfeLcvpNLQ2t FiMnQ7FRklj/6FUCfB3J80g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx3qZmMTUw6n8R9vnt9/T9erVzunca1zbdwiZFLECj1HiKkxQH5UK+zVjS+jz4EEdC4pVD7nw== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6398:: with SMTP id w24mr6634896otk.15.1579686160519; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:42:40 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Original-Received: by 2002:a9d:411a:: with SMTP id o26ls6960511ote.7.gmail; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:42:38 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5c8a:: with SMTP id a10mr6239626oti.95.1579686158340; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:42:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: jm-hh8AyDY1G20S+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org Precedence: list Mailing-list: list pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org; contact pandoc-discuss+owners-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1007024079513 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.text.pandoc:24258 Archived-At: ------=_Part_2238_1549345987.1579686157676 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2239_1765941705.1579686157677" ------=_Part_2239_1765941705.1579686157677 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Is there a need for a logo? I appreciate John=E2=80=99s pragmatism, as ofte= n seen =E2=80=94=20 this is not flattery. I, as a starter, plunged into the logo design topic= =20 forgetting, perhaps, its very purpose. Let's take a moment to reflect on=20 that. A logo is not here to provide graphical components and a favicon for=20 websites and other documentation; though obviously it can be used for that. The primary purpose of a logo is to uniquely identify =E2=80=9Cat first gla= nce=E2=80=9D the=20 brand it represents. Its prime characteristics are that it must be succinct= =20 and efficient. Now consider the world =E2=80=9Cpandoc=E2=80=9D. It is succinct (2 syllable= s) and efficient=20 (the word says it all about the software). In effect =E2=80=9CPandoc=E2=80=9D has become a brand of a widely used tool= which sets the=20 standard of the software niche it has created. Pandoc adheres to the UNIX philosophy: do one thing and do it well. This= =20 further enhances the quality =E2=80=94 one could say the =E2=80=9Crobustnes= s=E2=80=9D, of the brand. Don=E2=80=99t get me wrong here. Pandoc is a complex beast with a myriad=20 capabilities. But from a user perspective it is =E2=80=9Cdead simple=E2=80= =9D. And that is=20 the distinguishing factor of the =E2=80=9CPandoc=E2=80=9D brand. Pandoc, the brand, is well established in the community and has been for= =20 over a decade now. So, what distinguishing factor would a graphical component -- i.e. a logo,= =20 add to the brand ? Well I must admit after long meditation on the topic:=20 none. Consider the logos of companies like Coca Cola, Ford, IBM, Oracle. The logo= =20 is the brand=E2=80=99s name. The brand name (and its colour) allow you to= =20 immediately identify that brand. Adding a graphical component to the =E2=80=9CPandoc=E2=80=9D brand will not= significantly=20 enhance its visibility, will not make it gain more =E2=80=9Cmarket share=E2= =80=9D, will not=20 further extend/enhance the =E2=80=9Ccore business=E2=80=9D of the Pandoc so= ftware, =E2=80=A6=20 (because that is what PR is about). And speaking of PR, one could even argue that a logo is not a good idea. In= =20 an all visual world, often with little content, "good old Pandoc, says=20 little but gets the job done". And to be a little sarcastic, consider those= =20 legions of Javascript frameworks that have appeared in this decade and=20 almost immediately disappeared... they had wonderful and ever so promising= =20 websites, logos, etc. whilst their implementation remained beta or even=20 pre-beta.... where are they now? Does that mean that all the discussions made in this thread should be=20 trashed? No. Imagery to document Pandoc on various media is necessary.=20 Obviously. Be it in print or digital. Such imagery is necessary to create consistency and further enforce the=20 brand=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Crobustness=E2=80=9D. A favicon, a graphical repre= sentation to beautify=20 documents and blogs, a symbol to use in workflows and engineering diagrams,= =20 etc.. all are needed. But they should probably not be called a logo, least= =20 =E2=80=9Cthe Pandoc logo=E2=80=9D. They should simply be part of a standar= d visual=20 statement designed specifically for Pandoc. (Remember that the colour codes are as important =E2=80=94 if not more, tha= n the=20 graphical representation. All components of the visual statement must=20 adhere to the =E2=80=9Cofficial=E2=80=9D colour set. Think of Coca Cola=E2= =80=99s red or McDonalds=20 yellow :-) As food for thought, consider AWS (Amazon web services). The words "AWS"=20 and "Amazon", like "Pandoc", reflect the quality and value of the=20 associated products. Amazon has created (and actively maintains) a unique= =20 and distinguishing stencil set for engineering purposes=20 (https://aws.amazon.com/architecture/icons/). This is, in my (modified)=20 opinion, what this thread should about. Just strip the word "logo" and keep= =20 going :-) Thanks John. Cheers Jean-Michel PS: I initially started this reply as a long discussion on the pros (and=20 cons) of one letter logos =E2=80=94 the most famous being McDonalds=E2=80= =99 M =E2=80=94 which for=20 memory doesn=E2=80=99t (or didn=E2=80=99t) represent an M but two (initiall= y overlapping)=20 arches of their first (high tech) franchise. I stripped it because that=20 would have ended up as a long (and possibly boring) dissertation. In=20 essence none of the pros really apply to software products in general, and= =20 Pandoc in particular. Happy to drill this down if needed. --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= pandoc-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/= pandoc-discuss/a54a1823-e962-4aed-bd3b-5e6f1e8c2739%40googlegroups.com. ------=_Part_2239_1765941705.1579686157677 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is there a need for a logo? I appreciate John=E2=80= =99s pragmatism, as often seen =E2=80=94 this is not flattery. I, as a star= ter, plunged into the logo design topic forgetting, perhaps, its very purpo= se. Let's take a moment to reflect on that.

A = logo is not here to provide graphical components and a favicon for websites= and other documentation; though obviously it can be used for that.

The primary purpose of a logo is to uniquely identify =E2= =80=9Cat first glance=E2=80=9D the brand it represents. Its prime character= istics are that it must be succinct and efficient.

Now consider the world =E2=80=9Cpandoc=E2=80=9D. It is succinct (2 syllabl= es) and efficient (the word says it all about the software).

=
In effect =E2=80=9CPandoc=E2=80=9D has become a brand of a widel= y used tool which sets the standard of the software niche it has created.

Pandoc adheres to the UNIX =C2=A0philosophy: do one= thing and do it well. This further enhances the quality =E2=80=94 one coul= d say the =E2=80=9Crobustness=E2=80=9D, of the brand.

<= div>Don=E2=80=99t get me wrong here. Pandoc is a complex beast with a myria= d capabilities. But from a user perspective it is =E2=80=9Cdead simple=E2= =80=9D. And that is the distinguishing factor of the =E2=80=9CPandoc=E2=80= =9D brand.

Pandoc, the =C2=A0brand, is well establ= ished in the community and has been for over a decade now.

So, what distinguishing factor would a graphical component -- i.e.= a logo, add to the brand ? Well I must admit after long meditation on the = topic: none.

Consider the logos of companies like = Coca Cola, Ford, IBM, Oracle. The logo is the brand=E2=80=99s name. The bra= nd name (and its colour) allow you to immediately identify that brand.

Adding a graphical component to the =E2=80=9CPandoc=E2= =80=9D brand will not significantly enhance its visibility, will not make i= t gain more =E2=80=9Cmarket share=E2=80=9D, will not further extend/enhance= the =E2=80=9Ccore business=E2=80=9D of the Pandoc software, =E2=80=A6 =C2= =A0(because that is what PR is about).

And speakin= g of PR, one could even argue that a logo is not a good idea. In an all vis= ual world, often with little content, "good old Pandoc, says little bu= t gets the job done". And to be a little sarcastic, consider those leg= ions of Javascript frameworks that have appeared in this decade and almost = immediately disappeared... they had wonderful and ever so promising website= s, logos, etc. whilst their implementation remained beta or even pre-beta..= .. where are they now?

Does that mean that all the= discussions made in this thread should be trashed? No. Imagery to document= Pandoc on various media is necessary. Obviously. Be it in print or digital= .

Such imagery is necessary to create consistency = and further enforce the brand=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Crobustness=E2=80=9D. =C2= =A0A favicon, a graphical representation to beautify documents and blogs, a= symbol to use in workflows and engineering diagrams, etc.. all are needed.= But they should probably not be called a logo, least =E2=80=9Cthe Pandoc l= ogo=E2=80=9D. =C2=A0They should simply be part of a standard visual stateme= nt designed specifically for Pandoc.

(Remember tha= t the colour codes are as important =E2=80=94 if not more, than the graphic= al representation. All components of the visual statement must adhere to th= e =E2=80=9Cofficial=E2=80=9D colour set. Think of Coca Cola=E2=80=99s red o= r McDonalds yellow :-)

As food for thought, consid= er AWS (Amazon web services). The words "AWS" and "Amazon&qu= ot;, like "Pandoc", reflect the quality and value of the associat= ed products. Amazon has created (and actively maintains) a unique and disti= nguishing stencil set for engineering purposes (https://aws.amazon.com/arch= itecture/icons/). This is, in my (modified) opinion, what this thread shoul= d about. Just strip the word "logo" and keep going :-)
=
Thanks John.

Cheers
Jean-= Michel

PS: I initially started this reply as a lon= g discussion on the pros (and cons) of one letter logos =E2=80=94 the most = famous being McDonalds=E2=80=99 M =E2=80=94 which for memory doesn=E2=80=99= t (or didn=E2=80=99t) represent an M but two (initially overlapping) arches= of their first (high tech) franchise. I stripped it because that would hav= e ended up as a long (and possibly boring) dissertation. In essence none of= the pros really apply to software products in general, and Pandoc in parti= cular. Happy to drill this down if needed.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;pandoc-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to pand= oc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/= msgid/pandoc-discuss/a54a1823-e962-4aed-bd3b-5e6f1e8c2739%40googlegroups.co= m.
------=_Part_2239_1765941705.1579686157677-- ------=_Part_2238_1549345987.1579686157676--