On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> It looks to me that this modification drops the idea of the secondary
> color completely, I'm not sure that's the best trade-off. I'd like to
> avoid a situation where new subprojects have to nitpick between 72
> different shades of orange to find just the right one that has
> reasonable contrast but still provide a way for subprojects to make a
> distinction between themselves in the framework of the logo.
This modification does, in fact, drop the idea of a secondary color
completely.
I do think there's plenty of debate, long-term, to be had around how
individual subprojects are branded. But the imperative was to nail down
this first logo, and the prospect of maintaining a complex color palette
for all the colors of the rainbow simply didn't seem practical in the end.
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
