In my opinion, it is probably not a good idea to show a watermark by default.
(1) Suppose a website has some content that is illegal in certain local law, or has some controversial content, if we have the "Apache ECharts" watermark on it by default, it probably brings trouble to that brand and to our community. Even if the controversial content is outside but just next to the chart, it also might make final users connect it to the brand (depends on the style). (2) It will bother the users. Users have to find a way to remove the watermark, either for their own brand or for our brand. And some users may be confused whether they "can" remove the watermark. After all, brand is a sensitive issue, most of the developers and product managers can not have enough knowledge about that. I am worried some users may not intend to select an intrusive lib since there are many other choices. (3) A default watermark might affect the visual: it might overlap with some text or graphic, even if it is opacity. (4) Sometimes we can recognize some chart lib easily by some special features and default colors. Compared to them, if echarts print "it is echarts" literally, I am afraid it might bring an impression to users: it is not "smart". Thanks, ------------------------------ Su Shuang (100pah) ------------------------------ On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 at 11:06, Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ovilia <oviliazh...@gmail.com> 于2020年7月2日周四 上午11:02写道： > > > The watermark itself is a way to make it easier for users to share that > > information. > > > > As for whether it is required to state using ECharts inside, could Sheng > Wu > > or other > > mentors help answer this question? > > > > I think license says this, > https://github.com/apache/skywalking/blob/master/LICENSE#L100 > > (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works > that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and > attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, > excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of > the Derivative Works; and > > Apache 2.0 is business-friendly, it doesn't force the users to show this on > the product page. > Is this triggered by the thing, Apache SkyWalking requesting BoCloud > following Apache 2.0 License requirements? > > Sheng Wu 吴晟 > Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > Thanks > > > > *Ovilia* > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 10:50 AM Clement Ho <clem...@gitlab.com.invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > I'm a little confused at the proposal. Is it to add a mandatory > > > watermark/require users of ECharts to mention that they are using > ECharts > > > somewhere in their product or is it just making it easier for users to > > > share that they are using ECharts for their charting solution as an > > > optional configuration? > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:44 PM Ovilia <oviliazh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I'd like to propose adding a watermark stating something like "Charts > > > > provided using Apache > > > > ECharts (incubating)" in ECharts 5.0 which is displayed as small > > > > translucent text in the bottom > > > > right corner and developers may have a way to opt out > programmatically. > > > > > > > > The reason behind this is letting more visitors to those charts know > > that > > > > they are made with > > > > ECharts. We recognize that many developers may not make a statement > > that > > > > the product is > > > > made with ECharts as the Apache license asks. Since we have so many > > users > > > > (200,000 downloads > > > > each week on npm), it's hard or almost impossible for us to find and > > > check > > > > the violations. > > > > > > > > So, we could use the watermark as a way to provide a simple method to > > > help > > > > with the branding. > > > > If some users prefer to opt out and maybe make a statement of using > > > ECharts > > > > elsewhere in their > > > > product, they can do this easily with a simple option. > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > *Ovilia* > > > > > > > > > >
