Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Weird, I thought I'd have subscribed to the design list. Seems as if I have
cancelled the subscription by accident. And I wondered why noone works on
this stuff ^^.
Thanks Bernhard!

2011/2/17 Bernhard Dippold <>

Hi Joey, all!

You're totally that we want to go on with the Community Design.

But this will happen on the design list, not on marketing.

So please: everybody interested in this task: Join our Design Team.

The Kick-Off for the Design Team has reached it's third step: Introduction
of the Team Members:

The Community Design is one of the main points in Step 7 - probably to be
started in a few weeks, while the steps in-between are necessary to be
solved before.

CC'ing the design list, so the people there are aware of this mail...

Best regards


(for the design list I keep the full quote)

Johannes Bausch schrieb:

 Hey folks,

as far as I have followed the development so far it seems that both logo
icons (which make the gross of our branding) for the current release (3.3)
have been used quite extensively and seem to be the ones we will settle on
in the long run. I still want to share some thoughts about that.

1. What happened to the community branding? As the current logo has been
used so much, I must say that I want to speak *against* changing it again.
2. The wiki branding site is still full of ideas for logos, mascots, icons
etc. and it seems as if nothing is decided yet. And this is the official
position, isn't it? Having said that, I'd like to encourage you (us) to
somehow finalize the branding. There are so many great artists (see the
wallpaper renders of the icons) who use, yes, which drafts? - The official
one? The ones they like most? - for their work. I think it would be better
if we had a clear decision regarding branding, and that as soon as
3. There is no central place to look for resources (yes, since we haven't
decided upon an official version yet, I begin to repeat myself). The
wallpaper renders, for example, where are the source files for these
They look like Bernhard's, but even better. *They *should be the ones used
in the application.

Now some minor issues which I still don't like about the current
1. The "LibreOffice" still has no proper ligatures. From a typographic
of view the text looks cheap.
2. There is no proper spacing/connection between logo and logo text:
For me logo and text look like two distinct parts. There are several
for this. The edges on the logo are rounded while the text has sharp ones.
The lines of text and logo are not the same width.
3. I don't like the emboss effect on the "contemporary color" version
this might be my personal opinion, I still want you to consider that for a
second. In my eyes it just looks like a cheap gimp filter added to the
normal version).

As far as I can remember, we thought about starting work on the official
branding after 3.3 is released. I am willing to spend some time on this
issue over the next few months, but only if we can decide upon a goal in
this discussion.


Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.