W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2007

Re: A new Semantic Web logo?

From: Francois-Paul Servant <francois-paul.servant@noos.fr>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:21:03 +0200
Message-Id: <80ED290E-7C68-490E-9CF3-3B51ACEAEB39@noos.fr>
To: semantic-web@w3.org

Bernard Vatant a écrit :

> I like neither the new logo(s) nor the policy around it

neither do I:
- graphically, it is hard do a better job than the RDF logo, which,  
at the same time, symbolizes the basic molecule of the SW, and has  
given birth to many variations, based on a kind of "natural  
extensibility", that matches perfectly the deep nature of the SW,  
where links are so important.
- And the policy is indeed questionable. AFAIK, the Semantic Web  
doesn't belong to anybody. How could a logo, supposed to visually  
identify it, (and we know the importance of identification for the  
sw ;-) ) be requiring such a harsh condition as to link to a  
particular web page? (Furthermore, as people usually don't want to  
waste space in their pages, I have the feeling that they won't use  
this logo if they cannot use it in the way they see fit. Which will  
prevent it to be largely used, hence recognized.)

May I suggest a more entertaining requirement, in the form of a self  
illustration of the semantic web to be included in the HTML for the  
logo? Something such as:

"When used on the Web, the logo must be an active element of the  
Semantic Web, and therefore include at least, as RDFa data, the  
following statement:
this logo is a foaf:depiction of the semantic web".

(would this be enough to start a race in developping small scripts  
doing funny things when the logo is clicked, based on the use of this  
statement as a starting point?)

BTW, a question is: which URI would be used, in this statement, to  
identify the "semantic web"? (Surprisingly enough, googling the  
string "URI of the semantic web" only returns 2 results). Although  
"http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/" is often used, for instance, in FOAF  
pages as value of the foaf:interest property, this URI, as it stands,  
doesn't seem to be a good candidate: as the SW is not an information  
resource (or is it?), we should be 303-redirected when dereferencing  
the uri of the SW.

Best Regards,

Received on Thursday, 11 October 2007 23:30:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:41:06 UTC