Russel, I like your design. Would you mind attaching the revised logo via a JIRA and I'll try to update the project website.
Thanks a lot. Jeff On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Russell E Glaue <[email protected]> wrote: > I lost a little bit of the shadow transition to white, but otherwise are > one of > these G logos more acceptable? (I can redo the logo to make the shadow > transition look exactly the same as the current). > > The first puts the TM at the inside top right. > The second puts the TM at the outside bottom right. > > I included a small version to see how it scales down. The TM is barely > legible, > but otherwise scaled down okay for both. > > -RG > > > On 07/19/2011 06:55 AM, Kevan Miller wrote: > > > > On Jul 18, 2011, at 11:20 PM, chi runhua wrote: > > > >> Kevan, I just did a quick review and please find my comments inline. > > > > Thanks! > > > >> > >> Jeff > >> > >> On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Kevan Miller <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> All, > >> If anyone's willing to lend a hand on meeting our project branding > requirements -- help would be much appreciated. It's the PMCs responsibility > to insure the requirements are met. But anyone (contributor/committer/pmc > member) can help us meet the requirements. As a reminder -- > http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs provides a good overview of > our requirements. > >> > >> I've made a few updates to help us to meet more of the requirements. > More eyes to review would definitely be appreciated. Updates and > contributions would be quite welcome... From the checklist: > >> > >> 1) Project Website Basics : homepage is project.apache.org (check) > >> > >> Reviewed and okay. > >> > >> 2) Project Naming And Descriptions : use proper Apache forms, describe > product, etc. (I made some updates, today. Could use review) > >> > >> Reviewed and okay. > >> > >> 3) Website Navigation Links : navbar links included, link to > www.apache.org included (Check. I've made a few updates today for better > compliance). > >> > >> For sub-projects of Geronimo, shall we append Apache Geronimo prefix for > all of them, If so, the name might be too long... And the link to GBuild is > broken. Is it about the information of nightly build for both server and > GEP? > > > > GBuild was/is a distributed build infrastructure. We'll need to > investigate why that link is bad. We need to take similar efforts for our > subprojects. > > > >> > >> 4) Trademark Attributions : attribution for all ASF marks included in > footers, etc. (I've updated a template and appears to be working. Could > stand for some better formatting. We'll also need to review the whole site). > >> > >> Still ongoing... Shall we add the generic trademark attribution "All > other marks mentioned may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their > respective owners." to avoid any misunderstanding? > > > > I think we need to be explicit about our sub-projects. I am pretty sure > that we need to add the mark information for other pages (some(?) of which > are missing the footer. There must be multiple templates that need to be > updated. Formatting suggestions are welcome... > > > >> > >> 5) Logos and Graphics : include TM, use consistent product logo on your > site (This will take some work) > >> > >> Attach the graphics with TM mark for reference. It's kinda difficult to > edit a .gif file directly. You may notice that TM on topleft_logo is kinda > ugly.... Any suggestions are appreciated. > > > > Better than I would have done... ;-) But would be nice if we could create > something with a little nicer. Also, will need to confirm what is required. > > > >> > >> 6) Project Metadata : DOAP file checkedin and up to date (I've made some > updates and committed -- > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/site/trunk/doap_Geronimo.rdf). > >> > >> I used RDF validator[1] for rdf validation and there are some error > messages, not sure about the meaning of that, you comments are appreciated. > >> > >> [1]. http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/ > >> > >> Error: {E201} Multiple children of property element[Line = 38, Column = > 16] > >> Error: {E201} Multiple children of property element[Line = 43, Column = > 16] > >> Error: {E201} Multiple children of property element[Line = 48, Column = > 16] > >> Error: {E201} Multiple children of property element[Line = 53, Column = > 16] > > > > Cool. I didn't create the bad rdf, but i didn't see the problem, either. > Should be fixed up, now... > > > > --kevan >
