Joshua A.C. Newman wrote:
Nothing else on the site uses colors to distinguish things. It would
make these elements stand out dramatically.
I don't see why tooltips or a mouseover div wouldn't solve this issue
without bulking up the icon.
-J
On Jul 31, 2009, at 5:30 AM, Dave Crossland wrote:
So do we have consensus on these icons with the full acronym as text
next to it?
Only query I have remaining is if we keep all 3 as black or have
different colors?
On 31 Jul 2009, 10:26 AM, "Nicolas Spalinger"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dave Crossland wrote: > Full acronyms as text next to the icon is
good, but again, I think > you're ...
I see your point and you can probably understand where I'm coming
from
on this but licensing clarity is really a major feature of the whole
library.
This might be a small illustration, and we already have full
reports on
the page of the font itself but seeing as clearly as possible what
rights are granted or reserved right there in the list of fonts
is also
needed.
We care about good licensing and about not hiding it to
users/contributors of the site, it's part of what makes this service
stand out compared to existing font portals. Especially as the
webfonts
debate matures and recognizes the value of showing the right
metadata to
users...
There are at least 4 well-known and widely used licenses starting
with G...
-- Nicolas Spalinger, NRSI volunteer Debian/Ubuntu font teams /
OpenFontLibrary
http://planet.open-fonts.org
Joshua Newman Design <http://joshuanewmandesign.com/>
401.225.7222
I second that. The icons should be kept reserved and clear - no need for
extra emphasis.
Putting the "formal" aspect of how to integrate the icons aside, I want
to focus on something else:
Should the icons only purpose be "indicating a licence"?
Or do we want to show the real-life effects that licence has?
Because if we offer "really free" fonts in the first place - what's the
difference between those licencs?
Obviously there MUST be a difference if we choose to add icons - but
what exactly is that!?
... I think that's a challange we should face in order to answer the
questions that will arise.
If someone could distill the key differences, maybe we could try to
present THEM instead of the current licence/acronym icons. Because not
every visitor will read all the licences, understand them, find the
differences and be happy with our "tags". Most people will probably get
scared, thinking that they finally know what the difference of "free and
gratis" means, we suddenly show them 3 kinds of "free".
CC does a great job with their icons and descriptions.
but maybe half of my post is irrelevant, since not even I really know
the exact differences of those licences.
Robert
