W3C HTML5 Logo Unveiled • Hacker News Board

Re: W3C HTML5 Logo Unveiled

#51

Post by techiferous » Tue, Jan 18, 2011, 3:00 PM UTC

lwhi wrote: post #24

I'm not certain I like it. Think about its purpose; it needs to work with a huge range of styles, each of which will have specific and varied audiences. The choices made (collegiate typeface / bright orange) are quite bold; I don't think it lends itself to sympathetically supporting a broad range of differing styles of design. Also, when this is used, it's likely to be quite small - the gap between the tail of the '5…

Yes, the color orange is that loud, exuberant, hilarious friend you take on a pub crawl but never to church.

Re: W3C HTML5 Logo Unveiled

#52

Post by cemregr » Tue, Jan 18, 2011, 3:02 PM UTC

I'm surprised, the active states of the icons seem to be buggy in the latest chrome for Mac: http://cl.ly/0B0f0N3B1K2z3F2H3e0k

Re: W3C HTML5 Logo Unveiled

#53

Post by pamelafox » Tue, Jan 18, 2011, 3:07 PM UTC

shankx wrote: post #10

It looks lot like Superman's Logo (The one that's on his shirt)

I'm not sure if I love the standalone logo, but I am loving those shirts. Reasons why the shirt is awesome:

1) It's not black. (I have too many damn black tech shirts at this point in my life).

2) Sales profits go to development of the HTML5 suite. (A good cause!)

3) As you say, superman. And who doesn't want to be a super hero?

Ordering mine now.

Re: W3C HTML5 Logo Unveiled

#54

Post by tel » Tue, Jan 18, 2011, 3:22 PM UTC

lwhi wrote: post #49

tel wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very common to have structural changes in letters at different sizes in order to maintain readability, yet no one complains about consistency. Why? Because being consistent is very deliberately not supposed to require being identical. So long as the visual identity is maintained, and I think it is, then small changes are welcomed.

Most logos / marks need to be compatible with a broad range of media formats. Any system generally needs to be flexible - whilst remaining true to its original concept. If the mark needs to be altered to work in a particular format, I think that could show a lack of foresight on the part of the designers. I'm playing devil's advocate though. I think a very simple HTML + black shield border + black 5, could provide a…

They are distributing black and white versions like you mention. Moreover these can be easily colorized to subtly blend with a design. The ease of this transformation does show foresight. The real issue is instead the boldness of the shield and font choices, but that fits the use case of the logo which is pride in technology and standards compliance. Not every website must use the logo, obviously. All said and done, very, very few will no matter how popular the logo is.

I'm on a really poor connection, so I'll do research later, but the difference between display and body variants in fonts comes to mind immediately. Knowing the two distinct use cases will highlight very different properties of the font's design, the letterforms are varied. The differences can be fairly large, however it is always clear that the two fonts are from the same family.