The Noun Project seem determined to create a pictogram for every noun, and many short phrases:

See http://blog.thenounproject.com/

Huh.

What are the constraints on the symbols; eg: what resolution can the symbols be (so that we don't simply use detailed high-res pictures)? Are there any organizing principles, or is it meant to be just a huge bag of symbols? What convinces the project organizers that the result is learnable? There ought to be /some/ theory behind.

And what is the intended scope? I already see symbols for concepts that seem like a waste of the notional space ("Vulcan", and under the category "faces of evil"?!) for a set meant to be universal in some sense.

And the symbols that humans created (according to their video) "stood the test of time" – really? (What percentage?)

According to the video, "symbols have shared culture". Really? The expression "pork[-]barrel spending" and the associated symbol (from their blog) isn't exactly shared between dialects/languages and cultures, is it.

And really a minor point, but the video uses clichés (football mentioned in conjunction with Brazil) to illustrate the culture-independence of symbols and that they're understood everywhere.

And "encyclopedia-worthy" (from their blog) isn't exactly a noun. What is the intended scope of the project, and has anybody done a calculation to aid an assessment of whether it is realistic?

I don't have any statistics about how far they've got to date
Yes, where are their statistics?

Whew.

Stephan

Reply via email to