From: Phrogz <phrogz@...>
Date: 2007-10-31T12:45:01+09:00
Subject: Re: the result of Ruby official logo contest

On Oct 30, 9:31 pm, Phrogz <phr...@mac.com> wrote:
> I'm saddened by the outpouring of criticism that this logo has
> created. A few thoughts:

Here are a few more thoughts, that I posted as a comment on the Ruby
Inside article:


My initial impression was that it has a nice soft feel to it. Very
welcoming.

I'm not wild about the typography. Simplifying the choices of font
weight, capitalization, size, and alignment would (I think) help the
overall logo tremendously. (Of course, Matz has suggested that it
might often be used without the "Programming Language" bit, which
helps this point.)

Upon reflection and reading these comments, I agree that this
particular logo might not work well (as is) at a small size, or in a
reduced-color representation. I'm not sure if that's appropriate
criticism. Certainly variations on this logo can be created that both
have strong ties to the original and also work better than it in other
settings. I do not believe the best logo has to work - without
modification - for every purpose.

Yes, it would be nice to have a version of the logo that works in
website bookmarks and is still sort of recognizable. But I don't want
a 16 color favicon logo as the official branding of Ruby. I want
something better.

Can this logo be improved? Sure. Is it terrible? Definitely not.

Are some of the comments attached to this article insensitive,
unhelpful, and way out of line? I certainly think so.