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

[Kai Krueger]

Mike wrote
> On 26.04.13. 10:19, Kai Krueger wrote:
> 
>>> Current OSM logo lacks necessary properties of good brand visual
>>> identification, and thus it is not used much. The most obvious problem
>>> is it is not usable - you cannot use it as small mark in corner of the
>>> map as when resized to needed small resolution image it becomes
>>> unreadable.
>>
>> Is that really the case? At least for the typical web map I am not sure
>> I'd
>> agree that the current logo is a problem. At the same size as the Google
>> or
>> Bing logo is on their maps (which seems to be perfectly acceptable to a
>> wide
>> majority of users), the standard OSM logo seems just fine. Even the
>> extended
>> text based log ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm_linkage.png
>> )
>> seems fine at the typical size of webmap attribution logos.
>>
>> Obviously, it is not workable in all cases. E.g. on a small mobile screen
>> it
>> would use up to much screen real estate, but that is probably true for
>> any
>> significant graphical logo. There the attribution could e.g. be on a
>> separate about screen, or in textual form, which is appropriate for the
>> medium. But the majority of cases would imho be fine with the current
>> logo(s).
>>
>> Therefore my preference would be to recommend people to use the
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm_linkage.png logo were
>> possible
>> and otherwise fall back to the (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, ODbL
> 
> I agree with you in all counts except that suggested logo is suitable. 
> It is too big, it has to many details and too many colors.

Given that my main point was that the logo is suitable, I think you disagree
with me.

So again, I'd say at the size comparable to Google or Bings logo is fine.

I also don't see the colors as an issue. a) Google's logo is probably more
colourful than OSM's and secondly the OSM logo works perfectly fine if you
simply save it as a grey scale image rather than in colour. You barely see
the difference.

To prove the point. I added the extended logo reduced to black and white as
an attribution to a slippy map at
http://apmon.dev.openstreetmap.org/map_logo.html

To me that looks perfectly suitable

Kai



--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/RFC-updated-OSM-Attribution-Mark-was-contributor-mark-tp5758043p5758706.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.