Re: ITS 2.0 Logo

Yes, I was the one who pointed to HTML5-style badging but also pointed out that it can break down for us. It raises issues of how to create a meaningful visual icon for something like "Localization Quality Issue". While you can use an arbitrary graphic (I do not find the interpretation of the HTML5 ones to be transparent at all, for instance), you need a large installed base of people with a vested interest before it will catch on and be understood. I think our audience is small (probably, if I'm optimistic, two orders of magnitude smaller than that of HTML5) and the number of things we have to badge is much bigger than HTML5, so I'm not convinced little add-on logos would ever gain enough recognition to be anything beyond visual clutter.

I like Karl's idea about having a count of items supported. While it doesn't help someone just seeing the logo to know which ones are supported, I really don't think logos would do that either, and saying we have X number supported is visually much easier to work with.

Karl's idea of encouraging use of icons in menus is intriguing, but I think many environments where ITS 2.0 would be used don't support graphics in menus (at least not easily) and, if the icons appeared without text in a UI to save space, we'd still be faced with the fact that a reasonably comprehensive implementation would still leave people confused by arbitrary symbols.

Best,

Arle

On 2013 Apr 25, at 17:20 , Karl Fritsche <karl.fritsche@cocomore.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I think someone had this idea already. The Problem I see here, with 20 different data categories it will be a very big logo.
> 
> I like the idea from Felix better to just say "10 inside/included/supported". For more information you can read the documentation.
> 
> On the other hand, if we would have such logos for each data category, these could also be used in the implementation. Like in our case to use these as buttons for the WYSIWYG editor or in other implementations to add these as example in menus. Would be a great recognition value across all implementation. But I'm not sure in how many other implementations you would have a use for these.
> 
> Cheers
> Karl