Re: CSS Branding Meeting?

Hey, folks–

Here are the slides.

I'm happy to talk to anyone about the logo, and to hear any thoughts or 
reactions you might have.

Thanks–
–Doug

On 4/8/15 2:18 AM, Lea Verou 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/
>