On 6/30/14, 2:11 PM, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 June 2014 at 22:15:48 UTC, w0rp wrote:
>> I just finished translating all of the pages I have worked on so far
>> from diet templates to Markdown files. Now there is only one diet
>> layout loaded, and the rest is all Markdown files. This has
>> dramatically reduced the amount of memory consumed at build time. You
>> can see the results at the usual place at http://w0rp.com:8010 and
>> view the source on GitHub. I'll keep at it and convert more pages from
>> the main site.
>
> Please use the correct logo and the correct colours. Branding is
> extremely important!
>
> http://media.sukimashita.com/d/d-5.svg

My opinion is that the redesign preserves the spirit of the current logo while fitting in well with the flatter look. I think someone who sees the one logo will recognize the other in it (unlike some of the recent proposed logos).

On Monday, 30 June 2014 at 21:11:31 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 June 2014 at 22:15:48 UTC, w0rp wrote:
>> I just finished translating all of the pages I have worked on so far from diet templates to Markdown files. Now there is only one diet layout loaded, and the rest is all Markdown files. This has dramatically reduced the amount of memory consumed at build time. You can see the results at the usual place at http://w0rp.com:8010 and view the source on GitHub. I'll keep at it and convert more pages from the main site.
>
> Please use the correct logo and the correct colours. Branding is extremely important!
>
> http://media.sukimashita.com/d/d-5.svg

The logo on the site I'm testing is the most effective duck.

The logo is a placeholder I made with no graphic design experience. The old logo is a bit too fat and round to fit with the new design, so I'd like something which is obviously still the same brand, but looks a bit flatter.

On 01/07/2014 7:42 AM, w0rp wrote:

> The logo on the site I'm testing is the most effective duck.
>
> The logo is a placeholder I made with no graphic design experience. The
> old logo is a bit too fat and round to fit with the new design, so I'd
> like something which is obviously still the same brand, but looks a bit
> flatter.

I just found out why your logo looks terrible on my machine, you are using a web font in the SVG that FF isn't finding and there is no fallback specified so I'm getting a D in Times New Roman ><

A quick solution would be to convert the glyph to curves ("Object to Path" on the "Path" menu in Inkscape), then you will know that everyone is seeing the same thing.

A...

On 01/07/2014 8:40 AM, Alix Pexton wrote:
> On 01/07/2014 7:42 AM, w0rp wrote:
>
>> The logo on the site I'm testing is the most effective duck.
>>
>> The logo is a placeholder I made with no graphic design experience. The
>> old logo is a bit too fat and round to fit with the new design, so I'd
>> like something which is obviously still the same brand, but looks a bit
>> flatter.
>
> I just found out why your logo looks terrible on my machine, you are
> using a web font in the SVG that FF isn't finding and there is no
> fallback specified so I'm getting a D in Times New Roman ><
>
> A quick solution would be to convert the glyph to curves ("Object to
> Path" on the "Path" menu in Inkscape), then you will know that everyone
> is seeing the same thing.
>
> A...

However, the font is Apache licensed, so to use it in a logo you would need to purchase the Pro version for $80 dollars. This is why I do all my own typography!

A...

On Monday, 30 June 2014 at 21:23:59 UTC, David Gileadi wrote:
> My opinion is that the redesign preserves the spirit of the current logo while fitting in well with the flatter look. I think someone who sees the one logo will recognize the other in it (unlike some of the recent proposed logos).

On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 06:42:49 UTC, w0rp wrote:
> The logo is a placeholder I made with no graphic design experience. The old logo is a bit too fat and round to fit with the new design, so I'd like something which is obviously still the same brand, but looks a bit flatter.

No! You must use the original D logo, this is not up for debate. I will fight this until the end. You cannot mess about with the brand! We must start to approach these things in a professional and respectful manner.

The original D logo (and colours) must be used.

On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 08:34:30 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> On Monday, 30 June 2014 at 21:23:59 UTC, David Gileadi wrote:
>> My opinion is that the redesign preserves the spirit of the current logo while fitting in well with the flatter look. I think someone who sees the one logo will recognize the other in it (unlike some of the recent proposed logos).
>
> On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 06:42:49 UTC, w0rp wrote:
>> The logo is a placeholder I made with no graphic design experience. The old logo is a bit too fat and round to fit with the new design, so I'd like something which is obviously still the same brand, but looks a bit flatter.
>
> No! You must use the original D logo, this is not up for debate. I will fight this until the end. You cannot mess about with the brand! We must start to approach these things in a professional and respectful manner.
>
> The original D logo (and colours) must be used.

Doing logo restyling together with web site update is not unheard of. Why do you see this a big deal? As long as it is recognizable and not fundamentally different of course. Having logo that simply does not fit into new design is worse.

On Tuesday, 1 July 2014 at 08:34:30 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> No! You must use the original D logo, this is not up for debate. I will fight this until the end. You cannot mess about with the brand! We must start to approach these things in a professional and respectful manner.
>
> The original D logo (and colours) must be used.

I'd say your zeal is a bit misdirected. "Professional" brands are relaunched all the time. For a small sampling, check http://blog.saijogeorge.com/big-brand-logo-redesign-success-failure-stories/.

David

On Sunday, 29 June 2014 at 22:15:48 UTC, w0rp wrote:
> I just finished translating all of the pages I have worked on so far from diet templates to Markdown files. Now there is only one diet layout loaded, and the rest is all Markdown files. This has dramatically reduced the amount of memory consumed at build time. You can see the results at the usual place at http://w0rp.com:8010 and view the source on GitHub. I'll keep at it and convert more pages from the main site.

I really appreciate quick links to current page headers added to the right side. Lack of this harms discoverability of existing docs a lot.

On 2014-07-01 10:58, Dicebot wrote:

> Doing logo restyling together with web site update is not unheard of.
> Why do you see this a big deal? As long as it is recognizable and not
> fundamentally different of course. Having logo that simply does not fit
> into new design is worse.

Some companies also use different versions of their logo for different purposes. One on the website, one on print and so on.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 2014-06-29 22:15:47 +0000, w0rp said:

> I just finished translating all of the pages I have worked on so far from diet templates to Markdown files. Now there is only one diet layout loaded, and the rest is all Markdown files. This has dramatically reduced the amount of memory consumed at build time. You can see the results at the usual place at http://w0rp.com:8010 and view the source on GitHub. I'll keep at it and convert more pages from the main site.

This looks awesome.  I like the new logo also.   Keep up the good work.

-Shammah