Re: CSS Branding Meeting?

I think they preferred not to share the slides, alas.

> On Apr 7, 2015, at 23:18 , Lea Verou <lea@verou.me> wrote:
> 
> Hi Coralie,
> 
> Do we have the slides anywhere? I imagine these slides won’t make much sense to Tab without any visuals.
> 
> Cheers,
> Lea
> 
> Lea Verou ✿ http://lea.verou.me ✿ @leaverou
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Apr 8, 2015, at 02:13, Coralie Mercier <coralie@w3.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, 08 Apr 2015 02:18:08 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Since I was on vacation all last week, what happened with this?
>> 
>> Hi Tab, all,
>> 
>> There are minutes of the presentation and subsequent questions:
>> http://www.w3.org/2015/04/03-logo-minutes.html
>> 
>> ... available in text form at the bottom.
>> 
>> Coralie
>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi, folks–
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks again to everyone who's interested. We have determined that
>>>> tomorrow at 2pm ET / 11am PT works best.
>>>> 
>>>> Michael will be doing a screencast:
>>>> http://join.me/ocupopscreen
>>>> 
>>>> I'll set up a phone bridge, and we can also meet in IRC. We'll keep
>>>> notes and logs in the wiki [1].
>>>> 
>>>> Here are some logistics for attendees:
>>>> Conference code 26631 ("CONF1")
>>>>   Phone:  +1.617.761.6200
>>>>    VOIP:  sip:zakim@w3.org
>>>> Chat and logs:
>>>>     Web:  http://irc.w3.org/?channels=logo
>>>>     IRC:  irc://irc.w3.org:6665 in #logo
>>>> 
>>>> Agenda:
>>>> * introductions / background (5-8 minutes)
>>>> * Ocupop presentation (15-20 minutes)
>>>> * Q&A (30-40 minutes)
>>>> 
>>>> Is there someone who would be willing to scribe this meeting?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Logos/CSS
>>>> 
>>>> Regards-
>>>> -Doug
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 4/1/15 10:49 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi, folks–
>>>>> 
>>>>> The meeting is now set for Friday at 2pm ET.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Note that this time is a change based on updates on the Doodle poll.
>>>>> Lea, I note that you indicated you weren't available at this time, and I
>>>>> hope you can attend anyway; your feedback would be useful.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'll coordinate with Michael and send logistics for the meeting today or
>>>>> tomorrow.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>> –Doug
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 3/30/15 1:46 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi, folks–
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks to everyone who's answered the poll so far!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Because Michael Nieling is the uniquely required participant, and he's
>>>>>> only available for 5 timeslots, I've modified the poll [1] to remove any
>>>>>> timeslot he's not available on.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As of right now, 8 people have filled in their availability, and Friday
>>>>>> at 3pm ET is the most popular slot (only 1 person can't make it then),
>>>>>> followed by Friday at 2pm ET (2 people can't make it then). Thursday
>>>>>> seems pretty unpopular, so I doubt that would work.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In the interest of moving this forward, I suggest that we try for Friday
>>>>>> at 3pm ET.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'll keep the poll open to see if a new trend emerges, but please block
>>>>>> that time out on your calendars for now.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If possible, I'd like to have someone from each of the browser vendors
>>>>>> and authoring tool vendors, since they showed the most interest in the
>>>>>> HTML5 logo. If you're not able to make it on Friday, please see if
>>>>>> someone else from your organization can do so; it doesn't necessarily
>>>>>> have to be someone from the CSS WG; a marketing person or devrel person
>>>>>> might also be a good fit.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> [1] http://doodle.com/x6btk5r5yxz39thp#table
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards–
>>>>>> –Doug
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 3/29/15 10:41 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi, CSS WG–
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Friday, I met with Michael Nieling from Ocupop, the design firm who
>>>>>>> made the HTML5 logo. He showed me the preliminary design for a possible
>>>>>>> logo, and I thought it was well done and effective.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We'd like to show it to the CSS WG now, to get your feedback. I'd like
>>>>>>> to find a time this week that suits all interested parties. I propose
>>>>>>> that we meet just after this week's CSS WG telcon, but in case that
>>>>>>> doesn't work, please fill out this doodle poll [1].
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please keep in mind that we're trying to keep this a little hush-hush
>>>>>>> for now, so we can surprise the community when the time is right.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> [1] http://doodle.com/x6btk5r5yxz39thp#table
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>> –Doug
>> 
>> Text snapshot of the minutes:
>> 
>> 
>>                              - DRAFT -
>> 
>>                          CSS logo/branding
>>                             03 Apr 2015
>> 
>>  See also: [2]IRC log
>>     [2] http://www.w3.org/2015/04/03-logo-irc
>> 
>> Attendees
>>  Present
>>         Doug_Schepers, plinss, MichaelN, alex_antennahouse,
>>         koalie, [Apple], Lea, dsinger, renoirb
>>  Regrets
>>  Chair
>>         Doug
>>  Scribe
>>         koalie
>> 
>> Contents
>>    * [3]Topics
>>        1. [4]Presentation
>>        2. [5]Feedback
>>    * [6]Summary of Action Items
>>    __________________________________________________________
>> 
>>  <shepazu> [7]https://join.me/ocupopscreen
>> 
>>     [7] https://join.me/ocupopscreen
>> 
>>  <scribe> scribenick: koalie
>> 
>> Presentation
>> 
>>  Doug: We had some ideas, learned good and bad lessons from the
>>  HTML5 logo
>>  ... pretty successful
>>  ... we didn't have the stakeholders at the start
>>  ... that's a downside
>>  ... so we wanted to get you involved early on
>>  ... Assets around the release; webpage, how to use
>>  ... we want to do that again this time
>>  ... we had a gallery "send us how you use it" but that didn't
>>  work so well
>>  ... we'll make a little video
>>  ... about what went into the process
>>  ... a shorter version of the presentation you are about to see
>>  ... in terms of timing of release:
>>  ... I don't know if there is a CSS milestone, anything relevant
>>  ... I invite you to suggest things
>>  ... failing that, I'd like to reveal that at the W3C W3Conf in
>>  July
>>  ... it will be live-streamed
>>  ... it would be great if said milestone could be met at this
>>  time
>> 
>>  [Lea arrives]
>> 
>>  Doug: reminder:
>>  ... we want a chance to refine this
>>  ... and to present it to the world in one sweep of the hand
>>  ... so please, keep this under embargo
>>  ... Leaks would spoil the majesty of the thing
>> 
>>  [Michael proceeds with [8]https://join.me/ocupopscreen ]
>> 
>>     [8] https://join.me/ocupopscreen
>> 
>>  Michael: I'm going to enlist your help on strategy
>>  ... how to make it accepted universally, and how to make it
>>  evolve
>>  ... we want the same enthusiasm around the HTML5 logo which
>>  people could remix
>>  ... I'm hear to propose solution
>>  ... what best communicates CSS
>>  ... Keywords about CSS
>>  ... CSS == creativity, execution on the Web
>>  ... It's evolving, it has improved, it's modular, etc.
>>  ... it's a foundation on which powerful tools are being built
>>  ... Moving from words to images...
>>  ... in logo design we aim for instant reaction to it and
>>  understanding of it
>>  ... one way is to leverage concept words
>>  ... We produced a hundred sketches
>>  ... moving on to solutions
>>  ... here are the ideas that didn't make the cut
>>  ... We wanted to convey the reality of CSS
>>  ... we played on promises of functionalities, the shape of CSS
>>  code might be,
>>  ... layers, modularity
>>  ... we played with how to incorporate those
>>  ... We wanted to highlight the sophistication of CSS
>>  ... Also we wanted it to work well in colour and in
>>  single-colour
>>  ... Early on, we wanted something more stylish than the HTML5
>>  logo
>>  ... This is a C and S, it looks like an ampersand
>>  ... but you don't see the meaning right away
>>  ... other ideas on CSS monogram in the shape of cascading water
>>  ... more shapes
>>  ... But all those didn't convey the power, depth, duality of
>>  styling of CSS
>>  ... we played then with 6-edge shapes
>>  ... and angular CSS monogram
>>  ... We went from hard cross-roads to breaks in the line weight
>>  ... to give a sense of how the lines are weaving into each
>>  other
>>  ... This is in one-colour
>>  ... back to the hexagon shape
>>  ... we came up with a cube in shades of blue
>>  ... it fits well side by side with the HTML5 logo
>>  ... Welcoming questions, focusing on what and why, less about
>>  how
>>  ... which is our job
>> 
>> Feedback
>> 
>>  Doug: Michael showed me an early version
>>  ... We wanted to be able to leverage characteritics of CSS in
>>  the logo itself, for example hover effect or drop shadow
>> 
>>  <dsinger> it would be cool to animate-assemble it, etc. too
>> 
>>  Doug: and have a way to simplify the complex shape in small
>>  size
>>  ... would that work?
>> 
>>  Michael: We wanted the build it with CSS
>>  ... We wanted it animated
>>  ... Doug can share a link
>>  ... as far as sizing goes, this is why we wanted the unique
>>  container
>>  ... without the monogran, we have the cube; a box
>>  ... it can play that role
>> 
>>  <dsinger> Am concerned about the number of lines, and that they
>>  are a bit ‘spindly’. Also wonder why the right two segments and
>>  bottom two are in different blues; it diminishes the ‘cube’
>>  effect.
>> 
>>  <Zakim> dsinger, you wanted to talk about lines and blues
>> 
>>  dsinger++ for feeding the record with his comment
>> 
>>  Michael: We added a diamond shape (the bottom of the cube)
>>  ... because we want the eye to see the monogram inside the cube
>> 
>>  <dsinger> ah, you want ambiguity between cube and gem. ok
>> 
>>  Michael: the cube is not visible at first
>> 
>>  Doug: How would you feel about showing the version that I saw?
>> 
>>  Michael: We could. We made adjustments to simplify things
>>  ... lighter line weight and addition @@ in the S
>>  ... we moved away from that to simplify further and make it
>>  more iconic
>> 
>>  Lea: I really like how it looks
>>  ... both cube and diamond
>>  ... however it feels too frail
>>  ... it doesn't have the boldness of the HTML5 logo
>>  ... it feels a bit too complex for a logo
>> 
>>  <dsinger> +1 to Lea
>> 
>>  Lea: it might not contribute to a strong brand
>> 
>>  Michael: It has far less negative space than the HTML5 logo
>>  ... it is not fragile since it is in a container
>> 
>>  <dsinger> would like to see it with the C heavier (and possibly
>>  then the C only can stay in small sizes?)
>> 
>>  Michael: when presented next to HTML5 logo, there is a notion
>>  of yin and yang
>>  ... weight could be refined
>>  ... point taken
>>  ... as far as brand, I think people will love to draw it
>>  ... geometric pattern
>>  ... I've been sketching it a lot; it's fun to draw
>>  ... so, point well taken; we can make it more powerful
>>  ... but not straw too far away
>> 
>>  Lea: Making is a bit simpler would help
>>  ... the first thought I have is: complex
>> 
>>  <dsinger> I think it’s a fine balance between ‘elegant’ and
>>  ‘fragile’ or ‘spindly’.
>> 
>>  <dsinger> ‘Complex’ is not usually a compliment.
>> 
>>  Lea: CSS is complex, but I'm not sure it would be good if the
>>  logo contributed to reinforcing the idea that CSS is complex
>> 
>>  Michael: It should not be intimidating
>>  ... we should aim at communicating it better
>> 
>>  Lea: a small version would not be distinguishible
>>  ... what's inside is the thing
>>  ... hexagon has been done many times
>> 
>>  Michael: Drawing the HTML5 logo analogy, you can't own the
>>  shape
>>  ... the HTML5 logo was adopted because it was shared
>>  ... There's a mark; the monogram, and the container
>>  ... You will be able to leverage itself
>>  ... the monogram itself doesn't need to be there at 16 px
>> 
>>  Doug: Both points well taken
>>  ... In the inner cube of the previous version, at the small
>>  icon size, you'd still be able to see the C inside
>>  ... Maybe we can play with the idea of merging
>> 
>>  Michael: Yes
>>  ... and that might address the issue Lea raised
>>  ... and how to make it extensible as much as possible
>> 
>>  Doug: Is there anybody else who can give immediate impression
>> 
>>  Coralie: David and I both realised there was a cube when you
>>  mentioned it; we had seen the diamond
>>  ... I like it, this blew my mind and was representative of
>>  duality
>> 
>>  Michael: Having adaptable shape allows modularity
>> 
>>  David: I wonder if we could make the C a little heavier
>>  ... that would remain in a smaller version
>>  ... on the cube/gem ambiguity, only one side has lighter colour
>>  ... it looks like we're looking at the inside of the cube
>>  ... could we try to @@?
>> 
>>  Michael: Yes
>> 
>>  <leaverou> can we have this pdf to look at later in case we
>>  have more comments/suggestions later?
>> 
>>  Michael: And Doug, the cube within a cube, we had a C-letter
>>  form
>> 
>>  <alex_antennahouse> I think the outer S feels "wobbly", but the
>>  inner S is really good
>> 
>>  Doug: Comparing with older version, I like the spacing and the
>>  letter forms
>>  ... there is an arabic quality to them
>> 
>>  <dsinger> agree, I like the international nature of it. rather
>>  calligraphic
>> 
>>  Doug: maze-like, crystalin, pathways but also ... arabic,
>>  beautiful script. I like that refinement.
>>  ... spindiness is thus decreased
>> 
>>  <dsinger> realizes he forgot to say anything +ve, there is a
>>  lot to like here!!
>> 
>>  Michael: yes, we liked that it looked like it had been done
>>  with a calligraphic pen
>>  ... to the point of complexity, it has a number of twists and
>>  turns,
>>  ... they are repetitive
>>  ... allow modularity
>>  ... this is weighing in
>>  ... I appreciate the useful feedback
>> 
>>  Doug: Can you show something next week?
>> 
>>  Michael: yes
>> 
>>  Doug: Can I distribute slides?
>> 
>>  Michael: yes with the caveat that I want to inform this process
>>  with what we learned with the HTML5 logo
>>  ... big splash as it arrived without warning contributing to
>>  its success
>> 
>>  <dsinger> realizes it looks more like a Knot Garden than a Maze
>>  <[9]https://www.pinterest.com/mgwv/knot-gardens/>
>> 
>>     [9] https://www.pinterest.com/mgwv/knot-gardens/
>> 
>>  Michael: caveat: let's not share with the community; it's not
>>  as inclusive, which is why we here now, but please, let's keep
>>  it close to the vest
>> 
>>  <dsinger> thinks we should find an arabic calligrapher to
>>  comment on how they would write it
>> 
>>  Michael: especially as we're continuing to refine it.
>> 
>>  Doug: Michael/ocupop are doing this pro bono, by the way
>>  ... I'd like for us to be comfortable. let's try to strike a
>>  balance between how decisive we can be about this process
>>  ... I'll be in touch with everybody about next steps
>>  ... Any open questions?
>> 
>>  [nope]
>> 
>>  Doug: thanks everybody for showing up
>>  ... we'll schedule another round, hoping more people join
>> 
>>  <dsinger> I already like it better than the HTML5 logo :-)
>> 
>>  Michael: We don't care if you like it. Ultimately, what we care
>>  about is if it's effective.
>>  ... I want people to be excited about
>> 
>>  [thanks all]
>> 
>>  Michael_Nieling, I like it a lot, well done
>> 
>> Summary of Action Items
>> 
>>  [End of minutes]
>>    __________________________________________________________
>> 
>> 
>>   Minutes formatted by David Booth's [10]scribe.perl version
>>   1.140 ([11]CVS log)
>>   $Date: 2015/04/03 20:00:31 $
>> 
>>    [10] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>>    [11] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Coralie Mercier  -  W3C Marketing & Communications -  http://www.w3.org
>> mailto:coralie@w3.org +336 4322 0001 http://www.w3.org/People/CMercier/
> 
> 

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Wednesday, 8 April 2015 16:01:31 UTC