Re: New logo artwork?

* Ian B. Jacobs wrote:
>>  It seems reasonable to assume that because
>> 
>>   * they now use the old #005A9C blue instead of the "new" #083D94
>>     (which would be a very bad idea, in my opinion)
>
>005A9C is the official RGB of W3C blue and any others for screen
>are errors (which we are correcting).

Please count me among the people who prefer to stick with the de facto
official blue that has been in dominant use for many years on the W3C
web site. I hope others appreciate needless rebranding and inferior
colors more than I do.

>>   * the addition of SVG versions implies that popular user agents
>>     like Internet Explorer will typically render replacement images
>>     due to lack of SVG support in <img>
>
>We are serving SVG/PNG/GIF in that order. Do you see a problem
>on a particular browser?

Yes. As I wrote above, it is common for Internet Explorer to provide
no indication that PNG or GIF is preferred, so the server will pro-
vide the SVG version which is not supported in <img>, and as a result
all Technical Reports lack the W3C icon and have a broken image icon
instead, for example.

>I haven't announced the changes (or new logos) since I'm not done.
>I hope to be "done" this week. Done in this case may mean: the
>full set is installed, then we start making corrections.

I think a better process would be to give advance notice, prepare
and test all changes (possibly integrating feedback such as the
WAI and SVG activities would provide on the SVG images), migrate
to production systems, and then announce completion of it.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

Received on Wednesday, 17 May 2006 12:47:13 UTC