On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> It’s unrecognisable at favicon size. The camel is distinctive
> down to a handful of pixels. And if you add a shell to it, so can
> a pearl be. In fact a pearl in a shell is what iX magazine in
> Germany has used as the masthead for the
* Ricardo Signes [2010-01-03 14:35]:
> It would be a shocking display of benevolence on the part of
> O'Reilly to "give up" the camel. And... "live dangerously?"
> Do you mean: "piss off the publisher of many useful Perl books,
> opening ourselves to lawsuits and ostracism?"
>
> That's not a good
On Sunday 03 January 2010 at 09:23, Ovid wrote:
I would be happy to continue this discussion an another list; which one is
most appropriate?
> What is our concern vis-a-vis the camel
Any use of the camel in a fashion which may cause confusion with products,
services, or initiatives of the tra
Ovid writes:
> customer perception is important. ... From a marketing perspective,
> the camel wins hand-down. From a legal perspective, what are the pros
> and cons?
This definitely is important -- but as something which affects the Perl
community as a whole, this aspect of the discussion see
Ovid wrote:
> And let's face it: to many people, onions stink and they *do* make you cry.
> That's not a positive association.
>
> Perl: the language that will make you cry.
Shrek: Ogres arePerls is like onions.
Donkey: They stink?
Shrek: Yes. No.
Donkey: Oh, they make you cry.
Shrek: No.
Don
Ovid wrote:
> What is our concern vis-a-vis the camel and how can we approach O'Reilly
> regarding this concern?
http://oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/perl/usage/
Note the part about permissi...@oreilly.com
--
Just my 0.0002 million dollars worth,
Shawn
Programming is as much about organiza
--- On Sun, 3/1/10, Shawn H Corey wrote:
> From: Shawn H Corey
> > An onion can be pretty pared down before you lose
> sight of what it is.
>
> I pared many an onion and you loose sight of it when the
> tears start to
> flow. :)
And let's face it: to many people, onions stink and they *do* m
--- On Sun, 3/1/10, chromatic wrote:
> From: chromatic
>
> > Maybe someone could get a grant to hire someone/a
> company with design skills
> > to come up with a better logo than the onion?
>
> It seems rather unlikely that TPF will go through the
> business of applying for
> another trademar
Ricardo Signes wrote:
> The problems with pearls include: (a) promoting mispeling Perl as Pearl and
> (b)
> a pearl reduces, in its simplest depiction, to a circle. It's not very
> visually distinctive.
They're pronounced the same way. Perl as a pearl is a pun, a play on
words. (Of course, som
* Shawn H Corey [2010-01-03T07:22:01]
> Leo Lapworth wrote:
> > Maybe someone could get a grant to hire someone/a company with design skills
> > to come up with a better logo than the onion?
>
> I always thought that something to do with pearls would be nice.
The problems with pearls include: (a
* Pedro Figueiredo [2010-01-03T07:06:19]
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 11:40 AM, chromatic wrote:
> >
> > If the design of perl.org had been up to me, I'd have spent much more time
> > promoting the Perl brand instead of the proprietary brand of a privately
> > held corporation.
>
> For better or for
* Leo Lapworth [2010-01-03T06:21:21]
> Almost every person (of a dozen non-techies & .net developers in my office)
> I showed the Onion to were confused by it. They thought it was a 'sad' thing
> about making you cry, or just irrelevant. With the camel they thought it was
> a 'nice' image, e.g. th
Leo Lapworth wrote:
> Maybe someone could get a grant to hire someone/a company with design skills
> to come up with a better logo than the onion?
I always thought that something to do with pearls would be nice. Kinda
like this
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/La_nascita_di_Vene
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 11:40 AM, chromatic wrote:
>
> If the design of perl.org had been up to me, I'd have spent much more time
> promoting the Perl brand instead of the proprietary brand of a privately held
> corporation.
For better or for worse, the Perl brand *is* the camel. Either get
O'Reil
On Sunday 03 January 2010 at 03:21, Leo Lapworth wrote:
> Maybe someone could get a grant to hire someone/a company with design skills
> to come up with a better logo than the onion?
It seems rather unlikely that TPF will go through the business of applying for
another trademark because you don'
Hi,
2010/1/3 Eric Wilhelm
> Am I alone here in thinking that we should be using the Onion trademark
> rather than O'Reilly's trademark camel on the perl.org sites?
>
This is what I told the TPF marketing list when they asked...
---
The goal for www.perl.org is to encourage new people into Per
On Saturday 02 January 2010 at 18:59, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> Am I alone here in thinking that we should be using the Onion trademark
> rather than O'Reilly's trademark camel on the perl.org sites?
I agree completely. Using someone else's trademark is asking for trouble.
(If promissory estoppel
Hi all,
Am I alone here in thinking that we should be using the Onion trademark
rather than O'Reilly's trademark camel on the perl.org sites?
Thanks,
Eric
--
"But as to modern architecture, let us drop it and let us take
modernistic out and shoot it at sunrise."
--F.L. Wright
--
18 matches
Mail list logo
