Hi all,
Just a few (more detailed) comments on the six points I mentioned yesterday:
Bernhard Dippold schrieb:
[...]
At first there has to be a consensus on the goals to achieve.
We have at least three different goals with these icons.
A: ODF branding: Promote ODF by presence on the user's desktops. Keep
consistency between ODF files regardless of the application opening them.
B: OOo branding: Promote OOo by presence on the user's desktops. Keep
consistency between documents and OOo applications.
C: User interest: Recognize the files they want to open (and perhaps
recognize the application they want to use, because different apps allow
different actions to be done to the files).
All of these goals are valid, we might differ in the relative importance
of them.
Second is to find a way to include most of the ODF supporting products
and distributions in these goals and in the symbol language to be used
to reach these goals.
All comments I heard from our distros and what I read in the archives of
the OASIS list mention the necessity to modify the icons. Nobody (except
StarOffice) wanted to adopt these icons without modification.
Before we start to invent an icon style probably not supported by
others, we should find out, what will be necessary to include distros
and other products.
And if they are more likely to join when they can add one of their
symbols to the icons, this might lead to a broader acceptance of the ODF
icons than the restrictive present versions.
Even the color of the badge might be discussed. Why use a color never
used for ODF before? It's quite similar to OASIS blue
(http://www.oasis-blue.org/), but has nothing to do with ODF. The ODF
logo is dark yellow and violet
(http://opendocument.xml.org/wiki/odf-community-logo).
Third is to define a specification covering all the aspects of the icons
(including a dedicated marketing strategy for this modification).
The specs on the wiki is a good starting point, but not complete at all.
Open questions like the Apple HIG, Windows way to previews with
application icons at the corner, the usability of different document
types without color distinction are not solved.
More important: Implications on OpenOffice.org's branding identity,
visual design and marketing are not evaluated at all.
Fourth is about creating the icons and defining them to become the
default ones.
Depending on the results of the points above, the final icons might look
quite different from the present ones.
It will not be easy to achieve such a high quality graphical language
with modified preconditions, but if (for example) a colored shadow fits
more the user's needs and is decided to be more important than the
minimalist colorless style, such work has to be done.
Fifth means including them in test surroundings (user survey?) to find
out backdrafts not noticed before.
This might lead to iterative work on the previous points.
Sixth and last point is the final implementation of the icons in the
product, running the marketing campaign and releasing the product.
We are lucky to have enough time to prepare this thoroughly.
Without the right marketing strategy this might get as much negative
feedback as Renaissance, although both topics have the capability to
promote OpenOffice.org very very well.
Best regards
Bernhard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@marketing.openoffice.org
