[OSM-talk] Re : RFC updated: OSM Attribution Mark (was: contributor mark)

[yvecai@gmail.com]

I agree the logo is great, but not as an attribution mark.
To me, the most important thing in the actual attribution is '& contributors'
We should keep the text.
Yves

----- Reply message -----
De : "Marc Regan" <marc at mapkin.co>
Pour : <talk at openstreetmap.org>
Objet : [OSM-talk] RFC updated: OSM Attribution Mark (was: contributor mark)
Date : mer., avr. 24, 2013 17:54
Both the new mark and the copyright page look very slick.  Clean, friendly, inviting.  Great work!


-- Marc ReganCofounder, Mapkin


On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

Kathleen Danielson wrote:However, as there has been generally positive feedback for thedesign of this attribution mark, would it make sense to move forward with using the attribution mark (since it addresses an immediate problem)
Definitely. The perfect is the enemy of the good, and all that. If you waitfor 100% consensus on talk@ you'll never get anything done. And, as ever,stuff can be fine-tuned after initial deployment.
cheersRichard




--View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/RFC-updated-OSM-Attribution-Mark-was-contributor-mark-tp5758043p5758370.htmlSent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________talk mailing listtalk at openstreetmap.orghttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130424/15cce6b8/attachment.html>