From The Document Foundation Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


  • alexanderW
  • astron247
  • mirek2
  • SteveBell
  • thorsten


  • Save icon
  • 4.0 Branding process



  • Make new splashscreen ready for inclusion & get license from Maxim


<16:05:21> alexanderw: Hi, astron
<16:05:28> astron247: hi there
<16:16:39> astron247: shall we start? or wait ten more minutes?
<16:23:24> alexanderw: Wait a bit
<16:35:03> stevebell: Hi all, sry for being late.
<16:35:31> astron247: hi
<16:36:26> stevebell: isn't mirek here today?
<16:37:09> stevebell: should we post that the meeting is ongoing?
<16:37:39> astron247: i dont think we should do that again now
<16:37:55> stevebell: fine.
<16:38:54> alexanderw: hi
<16:39:29> mirek2: sorry guys for being so awfully late
<16:39:33> astron247: hi.
<16:39:40> astron247: havent yet started...
<16:39:49> mirek2: ok
<16:39:55> mirek2: have any attendees left?
<16:40:21> alexanderw: No
<16:40:24> astron247: no. but they have come :)
<16:40:29> mirek2: :)
<16:40:40> astron247: ok go.
<16:40:46> mirek2: alright
<16:40:49> mirek2: branding
<16:41:00> mirek2:
<16:41:13> astron247: maybe we could start with the question if we should revert to the old save icon...
<16:41:21> mirek2: ok
<16:41:31> mirek2: what did the old icon look like?
<16:42:04> alexanderw: a floppy
<16:42:18> mirek2: I mean, can you post it somewhere
<16:42:27> astron247: yes. give me two minutes
<16:43:13> astron247:
<16:43:36> stevebell: ah the save icon discussion. I've read about it online.
<16:44:29> mirek2: alright, I'm for it
<16:44:37> stevebell: difficult discussion. question is: will a floopy be a useful icon in ten years from now? I agree that the current icon isn't ideal but a floppy is somewhat backwards, isn't it?
<16:44:40> mirek2: though we'll have to change it for the new icon set
<16:44:45> astron247: gnome also has a newer floppy icon as devices/media-floppy
<16:45:03> astron247: its blacker...
<16:45:56> mirek2: ok
<16:46:01> mirek2: we could use that too
<16:46:37> astron247: uploading a screenshot of the larger version of it...
<16:46:43> astron247:
<16:46:47> astron247: done..
<16:48:17> astron247: alexanderW, SteveBell, what do you think?
<16:48:44> mirek2: SteveBell: it's true that a floppy seems somewhat backwards, but a) it's a widely-recognized symbol now, b) we might still do more user testing with other symbols in the future
<16:48:47> stevebell: I think it looks very similar to MS word. but it's ok.
<16:49:00> stevebell:
<16:49:04> alexanderw: agree with mirek
<16:49:28> mirek2: btw, I'd turn the icon 90 degrees for the Save icon
<16:49:51> mirek2: so that it's different from the Gnome floppy icon, as icons really shouldn't have various meanings
<16:50:08> mirek2: and so that it's different from Office for Mac
<16:50:20> stevebell: because you'd put the floopy in the computer sideways? is it a problem is it's too similar?
<16:50:29> stevebell: I'm not sure I agree with sideways
<16:50:35> mirek2: 180 degrees, I mean
<16:50:41> astron247: i dont think rotating it helps us. and the similarity with office on mac is fine imho. 
<16:50:41> mirek2: sorry
<16:51:03> astron247: afaik windows software often uses purple floppies
<16:51:49> stevebell: 180° really? I think it's best recognizable when in portrait mode as expected (with the slider on the bottom)
<16:53:00> mirek2: hm, ok
<16:53:13> astron247: word 2003, 2007, 2010 use a blue floppy. word 2000 and before used brownish-blackish ones
<16:53:43> mirek2: if we do go with the Gnome icon, someone will also need to make matching Save as and Save all icons
<16:53:53> astron247: word 2013 has a purple one
<16:53:56> mirek2: (and perhaps there are other save icons)
<16:54:04> astron247: right.
<16:54:28> astron247: thanks for the reminder. in that case, i guess we better just revert.
<16:54:38> mirek2: ok
<16:54:50> mirek2: sounds good
<16:55:19> stevebell: just trying to follow. gnome is the iloveubuntu screenshot you posted?
<16:55:33> stevebell: did we have a screenshot of the icon we'd revert to?
<16:55:49> astron247: the iloveubuntu screenshot shows the icon wed revert to (old tango)
<16:56:00> astron247: the dropbox screenshot has the new gnome icon
<16:56:25> stevebell: ah ok thx for clarifying. I'd be ok with that
<16:57:35> stevebell: so that is decided?
<16:57:47> mirek2: alex, what do you think?
<16:58:04> mirek2: ok to revert?
<16:58:13> astron247: i think alex agreed before. so ill try getting a patch out until monday
<16:58:21> mirek2: ok
<16:58:37> mirek2: move on to branding?
<16:58:41> astron247: yup
<16:58:50> mirek2: alright
<16:58:50> stevebell: not trying to digress but: looking at the icons
<16:59:11> mirek2: yes?
<16:59:15> stevebell: I noticed that the printing icons form iloveubuntu screenshot seem much more recognizable.
<16:59:18> stevebell:
<16:59:38> astron247: bigger size
<16:59:50> astron247: [its the]
<17:00:06> astron247: (at least partially)
<17:00:23> mirek2: astron247: I'm not so sure: I've heard a lot of criticism about our print icons
<17:00:34> stevebell: the current ones from LO seem rather unclear. maybe. maybe it's just what I#m more used to. I think I more often see the bottom ones. never saw the LO ones. and up till now never looked at them since I'm a keyboard command fanatic :P
<17:01:56> astron247: SteveBell: can you try with the large icons? libreoffice > settings > appearance
<17:02:10> stevebell: alexanderW do you have any thoughts on this? sure just a mom
<17:02:43> alexanderw: the humanity print icons have less details, maybe they would be a better fit>?
<17:03:24> mirek2: I like elementary as well
<17:03:40> mirek2: there might be a licensing problem, though
<17:03:47> mirek2: elementary icons are GPL
<17:04:03> stevebell: I agree. I think it's the level of detail (the shiny corners and the two rows of buttons at the top (in current LO) which aren't even aligned make this more difficult to recognize
<17:04:55> mirek2: right:
<17:05:13> astron247: have you read the comments below that post?
<17:06:41> mirek2: just reading them now
<17:06:46> mirek2: and they do have a point
<17:07:08> astron247: yah. i wondered about the categorisation when i read the post.
<17:07:28> mirek2: I know that I myself prefer the current print icon
<17:07:34> astron247: :)
<17:07:51> mirek2: it's just that this isn't the first time I've heard it criticized, so perhaps there is a problem
<17:08:22> astron247: i realise the small ones aren't great, but the bigger ones are imho much better
<17:08:23> stevebell: ok if astron247 thinks alike we don't have to do a long discussion. I just though I'd bring it up because in direct comparison that was my initial thought.
<17:08:53> mirek2: alright
<17:09:02> mirek2: branding?
<17:09:05> astron247: ok
<17:09:09> stevebell: fine
<17:10:23> astron247: so, no one answered yet to my asking for svg versions ... thats not great
<17:10:59> alexanderw: I'll upload my now
<17:11:02> mirek2: so, the only ones that seem to meet the requirements: Javier Antonio Nisa Ávila, k-j, Medieval, Mateus.m.luna, Maxim Darák, H.Sparks, G Sparks
<17:11:20> alexanderw: *mine lost the original after a reinstall
<17:12:05> mirek2: astron247: we only the finished one, really
<17:12:21> mirek2: we can get that along with a license statement
<17:12:49> mirek2: let's discuss the proposals one by one
<17:13:12> mirek2: I should mention that Javier Antonio Nisa Ávila proposed a Start screen for all his proposals as well
<17:13:22> mirek2: and an About dialog header as well, I think
<17:13:42> astron247: mirek2: we need an svg for the about header
<17:13:59> astron247: ... i.e. there, it is a requirement.
<17:14:28> mirek2: really?
<17:14:31> astron247: yes.
<17:14:53> astron247: it even scales depending on screen size. so we cant even just put a png inside an svg.
<17:14:57> mirek2: :) I'm surprised that the new About dialog mandates SVG when the old one couldn't handle them
<17:15:47> astron247: so, for the next time, please do ask for svgs too
<17:15:56> mirek2: definitely
<17:16:09> astron247: ... its also a good idea because it enables other people to build on older material
<17:16:12> astron247: ...
<17:16:16> astron247: okay.
<17:16:27> mirek2: definitely
<17:17:24> astron247: javiers proposal?
<17:17:30> mirek2: right
<17:17:41> astron247: (proposals)
<17:18:09> mirek2: if something scalable is needed, the first proposal isn't a good fit
<17:18:32> astron247: yeah. but i also don't like either of the three
<17:18:58> mirek2: the others are better, but the alignment seems off, and the gradient doesn't add anything to it
<17:19:05> mirek2: I don't think it's better than what we have
<17:19:27> mirek2: alex, steve, your thoughts?
<17:19:49> mirek2: (please try to be descriptive, rather than just saying like/dislike)
<17:20:13> stevebell: aligning is really off. and agree: not better than what exists
<17:20:22> mirek2: ok
<17:20:34> mirek2: k-j's proposal
<17:20:43> astron247: too dark imho
<17:20:56> mirek2: I agree
<17:21:12> mirek2: and the "Get involved" text seems like it doesn't belong there
<17:21:21> mirek2: at first, I thought it was meant to be an icon
<17:21:26> astron247: and im not sure the get involved stuff isnt too involved for users (if thats a valid opinion) ... especially because it is not even a link
<17:21:27> mirek2: I mean, a button
<17:21:47> mirek2: agreed
<17:21:55> stevebell: what is it? just a statement?
<17:22:01> mirek2: yup
<17:22:09> stevebell: get involved isn't too cool on the splash. imo belongs on the about ...
<17:22:26> astron247: im also not sure how i feel about the positioning of get involved and libreoffice relative to the icons below in the start centre
<17:22:54> mirek2: the get involved button seems kind of useless without offering a way to get involved
<17:23:06> stevebell: absolutely
<17:23:36> mirek2: Medieval's proposal, then
<17:24:01> astron247: the first one seems small & sweet. the second one is maybe a bit overbearing
<17:24:16> astron247: neither of them are very much swiss style though
<17:24:30> mirek2: I agree
<17:24:31> astron247: – not sure if that is an argument...
<17:24:41> stevebell: they are both not bad. the second one is nice because the dark background emphasizes the bright green
<17:24:42> mirek2: it is, since we did ask for it
<17:24:55> stevebell: what is not swiss in that regard?
<17:25:06> mirek2: the second one breaks our guidelines
<17:25:13> astron247: steve, we linked to that stuff last time
<17:25:25> astron247: right, the colour is probably off
<17:25:37> mirek2: well, the logo should be pure white
<17:25:43> stevebell: no doubt. but I just wonder is no one is able to put it into words. I'm not sure how we can discuss "swiss".
<17:25:53> stevebell: *is = if
<17:26:06> astron247: we did try to explain it too.
<17:26:30> stevebell: I read the wikipedia article. something about aligning things. and use of fonts
<17:26:31> mirek2: well, Swiss style is basically about emphasizing typography, putting type at the forefront
<17:26:50> mirek2: therefore, no complex backgrounds or overly decorative elements
<17:27:08> mirek2: the type should be the dominant element of a design
<17:27:32> astron247: grids, helvetica/other strong sans-serif typefaces/reduction of colours/emphasising the practical aspect/left-aligned text
<17:27:53> stevebell: thanks mirek. now we can discuss. well I'm not sure if a background is overly compley, just because it is dark? and as I said the darkness even emphasizes the font. then how is this not swiss?
<17:28:30> mirek2: SteveBell: the design may be swiss, but it doesn't follow our guidelines
<17:28:42> stevebell: hehe first I heard it's not swiss
<17:28:52> astron247: branding guidelines, because the colours are off
<17:28:59> astron247: what you heard was about the first one
<17:29:12> astron247: (first proposal that medieval made)
<17:29:27> stevebell: yes. but astron talked about swiss (see above)
<17:29:45> mirek2: (my "I agree" referred to Astron's first sentence)
<17:30:16> stevebell: ok, I won't start looking for dark splashes, but adobes lightroom comes to mind.
<17:30:17> astron247: no were caught up in that one catch-22 scene, i guess..
<17:30:45> astron247: SteveBell: what do you mean by "lightroom comes to mind"?
<17:30:51> astron247: is that relevant?
<17:31:07> stevebell: well I mean the fact that dark splashes don't do harm to users.
<17:31:15> stevebell: they might even look good
<17:31:21> astron247: certainly not.
<17:31:34> mirek2: right, we're not ruling out dark splashes
<17:31:37> astron247: but the green is not one of our branding greens
<17:32:12> stevebell: ok, that is def guidelines not met, then.
<17:32:25> stevebell: pity, it otherwise looks good I think.
<17:32:27> mirek2: onto Mateus.m.luna's proposal
<17:32:31> stevebell: ok
<17:33:12> mirek2: it seems to meet all the guidelines, all the requirements, and looks very professionally designed
<17:33:28> astron247: right.
<17:33:42> mirek2: I like the corner suggestive of a page flip, which, as it points to the logo, brings focus to it
<17:34:32> astron247: one problem that is see with the dog-ear though is that it is not the same rounded dog ear that is on out document icon
<17:35:00> mirek2: it's not supposed to be, though
<17:35:21> astron247: no, but its still a bit odd to me
<17:36:37> astron247: and then, id personally kind of like to get off the all-green trip weve been on since 3.6 – so id rather have the first one than the second
<17:37:22> mirek2: the issue I have with the first two proposals is that the dog-ear seems misplaced
<17:37:23> astron247: at the same time the green and black thing looks a bit harsh, i am not quite sure if it would get better if we used a grey there
<17:37:26> stevebell: my 2 cents: not too fond of this. somehow the ongoing overall hard contrast hurts my brains.
<17:37:29> alexanderw: maybe only the 'Libre' in green?
<17:38:15> stevebell: that could solve my problem with this proposal
<17:38:39> astron247: alexanderW: nice idea. but still maybe we could do away with the black?
<17:38:50> astron247: (in favor of grey)
<17:39:20> mirek2: SteveBell: what do you think about
<17:39:24> alexanderw: I prefer the grey in version 2, too
<17:39:36> mirek2: me too
<17:39:58> astron247: can you make it a bit lighter still?
<17:41:07> alexanderw: who?
<17:41:23> astron247: mirek2
<17:41:43> mirek2: once I get the SVG?
<17:41:54> astron247: i thought you already had it
<17:42:20> astron247: sorry
<17:42:21> mirek2: no, I don't think so
<17:42:41> stevebell: mirek2 that's a little better. still I find this too playful.
<17:43:16> astron247: ok. also, another technical niggle is that the logo is squished on the splash screen and the about screen banner
<17:43:26> mirek2: I would say "playful" is a good quality
<17:44:24> mirek2: astron247: I didn't notice
<17:44:39> mirek2: but, yeah, it should be unsquished
<17:45:03> mirek2: that would be very easy to fix, though
<17:45:31> astron247: sure
<17:46:09> mirek2: so, out of the 4 proposals, we agree that 2 is best
<17:46:13> mirek2: right?
<17:46:20> alexanderw: yes
<17:46:27> stevebell: we don't discuss alex' proposal?
<17:46:49> astron247: yes
<17:47:13> stevebell: oh that was my favorite.
<17:47:27> mirek2: well, the proposal remains unchanged since we asked for changes
<17:47:30> astron247: SteveBell: answering mirek not you
<17:48:13> alexanderw: the svg contains a version with the flat green of our previous branding
<17:48:36> mirek2: ok, let's discuss it, then :)
<17:48:38> astron247: okay. can you post a link here?
<17:48:55> alexanderw:
<17:49:34> stevebell: the icon is not filled green (mentioned earlier) but I like it how it is.
<17:49:44> stevebell: looks very clean and professional
<17:50:14> stevebell: not sure what the stats in the low right corner should symbolize.
<17:50:33> alexanderw: templates / extensions / help
<17:50:48> alexanderw: *info
<17:51:01> stevebell: the splash is my winner. it just brings LO to a contemporary design.
<17:51:15> mirek2: the proposal is on the right, right?
<17:51:43> stevebell: alexanderW what can the user do with those? click them? I was talking about the splash screen
<17:51:43> mirek2: my thoughts:
<17:51:45> alexanderw: the one with flat colors, yes
<17:52:07> mirek2: SteveBell: that one's not part of the proposal
<17:52:14> astron247: alexanderW: steve surely means the one on the splash screen
<17:52:17> mirek2: for the current proposal, scroll to the right of the image
<17:52:26> alexanderw: @ SteveBell: They take you to, and
<17:52:27> stevebell: ah sry all
<17:52:28> stevebell: yes
<17:52:43> mirek2: my thoughts:
<17:52:54> astron247: alexanderW: i think youre answering another question
<17:53:02> astron247: (that was not asked)
<17:53:17> mirek2: * splash not very Swiss: the predominant item is the dog ear, not the logo
<17:53:18> alexanderw: oh
<17:53:44> alexanderw: @SteveBell that doesn't belong there
<17:54:42> mirek2: * the logo on the Start screen seems oversized and isn't consistent with the About and splash design
<17:55:00> astron247: right, the logo would definitely have to be replaced
<17:55:31> mirek2: * the progress indicator won't be doable
<17:56:01> stevebell: the splash font could be a tiny little bit bigger imo
<17:56:20> astron247: mirek2: the progress indicator is doable on a solid background
<17:56:21> alexanderw: is the frame around the progress bar required?
<17:56:27> stevebell: and I have a clear preference for the dark green. the light green is screeming too much for my ears.
<17:56:46> astron247: alexanderW: yes, but we can colour it the same as the background
<17:56:46> mirek2: alexanderW: no, but the progress indicator has a fixed size
<17:57:06> stevebell: the frame can't be transparent?
<17:57:19> astron247: mirek2: what do you mean by it having a fixed size?
<17:57:22> mirek2: SteveBell: nope
<17:57:35> mirek2: astron247: doesn't the indicator have a fixed height?
<17:57:45> astron247: no
<17:58:05> mirek2: oh, ok, nevermind
<17:58:49> stevebell: for me the startcenter is the weak point
<17:58:59> astron247: there is an overall height–2 pixels distance–2 pixels frame=progress bar height
<17:59:13> mirek2: ok
<17:59:30> astron247: SteveBell: agree
<17:59:54> astron247: it doesnt fit and the logo is huge
<17:59:54> stevebell: I like how this sorts the startcenter icons. having the top designed similar to the about (I assume it is) (the third on the bottom) would be great.
<18:00:01> mirek2: for me as well, though I'm not a fan of the dog ear on the splash either
<18:00:29> stevebell: and about / maybe redone startscreen would be great in the dark green for my eyes
<18:00:33> astron247: btw, a version of this splash used to ship on opensuse some time ago
<18:00:53> mirek2: SteveBell: we can't use the original dark green, as it's not the brand color
<18:01:10> mirek2: we can use a dark green from the branding guidelines, though
<18:02:14> alexanderw: they're all pretty saturated
<18:02:39> stevebell: also if the dog ear is not required maybe it can be eleminated? a complete flat splash might look fine too. and a darker green might be worht a try. although is that is the dark green I think it looks very booring:
<18:03:29> alexanderw:
<18:03:40> mirek2: alexanderW: I agree
<18:03:41> stevebell: the startcenter which I liked the aligning of the icons was:
<18:03:48> alexanderw: That is the dark green
<18:03:54> mirek2: SteveBell: we can't realign the icons
<18:04:01> stevebell: ok
<18:04:09> mirek2: it's past UI freeze
<18:04:41> mirek2: alexanderW: this is something we'd need to discuss with marketing, though
<18:04:58> alexanderw: what?
<18:05:45> mirek2: decreasing the saturation of our greens
<18:05:51> stevebell: well to summarize my opinion: I like this a lot, it's serious and solid (the splash / about). and I like that for an office application. the startcenter does not fit at all currently.
<18:07:38> mirek2: I like the logo redesign, with LibreOffice the same height of the icon, but that's something that would also need to be run by the marketing team
<18:08:09> mirek2: and it can't be a factor that we judge the design on, since the other proposals would be disadvantaged
<18:08:22> mirek2: (as we forbade making changes to the logo)
<18:09:19> mirek2: any more thoughts?
<18:09:34> astron247: move on...
<18:09:40> mirek2: ok
<18:09:46> mirek2: Maxim Darák's proposal
<18:10:06> mirek2: I like its simplicity and consistency
<18:10:35> astron247: right. i like it too. but it could give the text a bit more vertical space
<18:10:41> astron247: (ie whitespace)
<18:11:10> mirek2: we wouldn't be able to reorganize the start screen in the suggested way, but it's easy to redesign it for the current design
<18:11:23> astron247: also, with the current design it is impossible to put messages on the splash screen – we need that for the first start on windows
<18:11:28> astron247: (and mac, i believe)
<18:12:02> mirek2: what are the messages for?
<18:12:11> mirek2: are they really needed?
<18:12:11> astron247: activating addons
<18:12:20> astron247: we cant get rid of them now
<18:12:31> astron247: (that is all that counts i guess)
<18:12:47> mirek2: why isn't it required on Linux, then?
<18:13:07> alexanderw: for betas it is, I think
<18:13:22> mirek2: right, but we're talking about the final release
<18:13:51> mirek2: for betas, it shouldn't be a problem if the text appears right below the logo
<18:14:04> mirek2: even though it will look kind of cramped
<18:14:33> mirek2: it's a beta, that kind of stuff shouldn't really matter there
<18:15:31> astron247: i have no idea why it does not happen on linux. but linux uses other code to draw the splash screen, too than do mac and windows
<18:16:10> mirek2: from what I've seen, the messages look out of place there as well
<18:16:21> astron247: also, it is necessary on the first start of any version of libreoffice on windows, but it never happens on wondows
<18:16:32> mirek2: if messages are required, we really should have asked for a design tailored to them
<18:16:35> astron247: mirek2: we had a bug about that
<18:16:53> astron247: it is solved now ... try to find it
<18:17:06> astron247:
<18:17:16> mirek2: I don't understand what they're for, though, as you can't guarantee that the splash will be present long enough to read the text
<18:18:11> mirek2: alright
<18:18:25> mirek2: since we didn't mention this, we can't penalize the proposal
<18:18:35> mirek2: and it should be easy to add the required whitespace
<18:18:43> astron247: no, but we need to make it look ok on windows nevertheless
<18:18:54> mirek2: yes
<18:18:59> astron247: mirek2: agree its easy
<18:19:02> mirek2: we'll just add whitespace
<18:19:49> mirek2: anyway, I think Maxim's proposal is really good, and seems in line with Swiss design
<18:20:04> mirek2: what are your thoughts?
<18:20:36> astron247: like
<18:21:20> alexanderw: maybe use grey instead of black in the logo? The contrast is a bit crass
<18:21:47> stevebell: it's reduced and simply yet a bit boring. alex: agreed.
<18:21:48> mirek2: okay, I'd ask Maxim if he'd be ok with that if we go for this proposal
<18:21:59> stevebell: *simple
<18:22:20> mirek2: changing it to look like ?
<18:22:26> mirek2: I think simple is actually very good
<18:22:47> alexanderw: yes
<18:23:20> mirek2: just for comparison, I'll post Office Word's and iWork Pages's splashes
<18:23:25> stevebell: yes, I'm ok with it.
<18:23:32> mirek2:
<18:23:52> mirek2: oh, wait, iwork doesn't have a splash
<18:25:32> mirek2: so, everyone like?
<18:25:41> stevebell: me like
<18:25:53> mirek2: no specific comments?
<18:25:53> astron247: this seems to be the real word splash: 
<18:25:54> astron247:
<18:26:20> mirek2: oh, ok
<18:26:29> stevebell: although i hate MS, this looks cool. can get much simpler than that.
<18:26:39> stevebell: * can't
<18:27:08> mirek2: see -- that's Swiss style
<18:27:16> stevebell: :)
<18:27:16> mirek2: though I really don't like the font they chose
<18:27:21> astron247: the thing is they really have _great_ colours. (and a nice ripoff of frutiger)
<18:27:43> mirek2: :) Vegur is pretty good too
<18:28:01> mirek2: but I do agree that we should do something about our colors
<18:28:04> astron247: mirek2: its segoe, thats the font microsoft has been using for years. (since vista it has been used in uis too)
<18:28:23> mirek2: I know -- I was talking about our own font
<18:29:02> mirek2: anyway, two more proposals to discuss
<18:29:05> astron247: just because you said you didnt like their font
<18:29:33> astron247: (which ive now heard surprisingly often about frutiger... odd)
<18:29:40> astron247: (and its offspring
<18:29:40> astron247: )
<18:30:11> mirek2: in most situations, I like Segoe, just don't like how the word "Word" looks in it, I guess
<18:30:30> mirek2: anyway, H.Sparks's proposal
<18:30:47> mirek2: I think it's too busy
<18:30:49> alexanderw: so many icons
<18:30:59> mirek2: lack of Swiss style
<18:31:10> mirek2: odd alignment
<18:31:31> mirek2: except alignment, I would say the same for G Sparks proposal
<18:31:57> mirek2: which I prefer, but don't like either
<18:32:03> mirek2: other thoughts?
<18:32:47> astron247: i like the g sparks one better. but the font in the background is a bit odd
<18:33:39> astron247: might have become workable if it instead used the real logo in the background or so... dunno
<18:35:55> mirek2: alex, steve, your thoughts?
<18:36:11> alexanderw: one sec, telephone
<18:43:37> alexanderw: tbh, I don't like either of them in particular
<18:44:59> mirek2: yeah, me neither
<18:45:22> astron247: ok
<18:45:37> mirek2: ok, then
<18:45:57> mirek2: it seems that we had least issue with Maxim Darák's proposal?
<18:46:46> mirek2: only to add whitespace to the splash, use the logo colors from, and, of course, there needs to be an about screen design
<18:47:42> mirek2: which would simply use the same style, I assume
<18:47:51> mirek2: and therefore shouldn't be hard to craft at all
<18:49:19> astron247: what about mateus's design?
<18:49:34> mirek2: Mateus's and Alexander's proposals seemed popular as well, but there seemed to be more issues with them
<18:49:47> mirek2: in Mateus's case, it was the contrast
<18:50:35> astron247: right.
<18:51:31> astron247: ok, then can you take care of adapting everything? send it to me tomorrow and ill make a patch of it.
<18:52:09> mirek2: ok
<18:52:38> mirek2: can you give me the specs for the about screen?
<18:54:06> astron247: there are no real specs, as it changes size wildly. but you can take a look at the source svgs of the stuff from last time:
<18:54:37> astron247: (also, make sure to produce both a version with the official logo and one with the community logo
<18:54:38> astron247: )
<18:54:40> mirek2: btw, can the dialog be resized in 4.0?
<18:54:54> mirek2: astron247: alright
<18:55:00> astron247: no. it resizes itself depending on screen size
<18:55:13> astron247: its not ported to .ui either
<18:55:32> mirek2: hm, ok
<18:56:51> mirek2: hi thorsten
<18:56:53> thorsten: good evening gents -
<18:56:58> alexanderw: Hi
<18:57:17> thorsten: mirek2: the suspense is killing me - do we have modified artwork for 4.0? ;)
<18:57:54> mirek2: we've chosen Darak's proposal
<18:58:27> mirek2: but we'll go with the logo colors from
<18:58:31> thorsten: oook. so let us see what can be done. you realize that this is under rather quite tight deadlines? ;)
<18:58:48> mirek2: right
<18:59:28> mirek2: if the deadline isn't met, we can revert to the old branding
<18:59:48> thorsten: I need a day or so to test-build that -
<18:59:56> mirek2: I'll need to get Maxim's license statement, not sure how long that'll take
<19:00:01> thorsten: and we need the usual about.png backing_left.png backing_right.png backing_rtl_left.png backing_rtl_right.png backing_space.png intro.png with TDF branding, vs. community-branding
<19:00:17> mirek2: right -- I'll produce that
<19:00:20> thorsten: ok.
<19:00:23> astron247: oh god ... we need ... i didnt think of the license statement stuff.
<19:00:35> thorsten: well, the license can be done in parallel -
<19:00:49> thorsten: just I need the pics by monday
<19:01:08> astron247: we should be able to do that.
<19:01:16> thorsten: final make-or-break decision on tuesday nigght or wednesday, I think
<19:01:24> mirek2: alright
<19:01:28> thorsten: (we'd need the license by then)
<19:01:34> mirek2: ok
<19:01:52> thorsten: and: you guys rock - thanks so much for doing this!
<19:02:14> astron247: sorry thorsten for going about this so late.
<19:02:27> astron247: we really should have known better i guess
<19:02:34> thorsten: ah well, I'm usually doing stuff last-minute myself.
<19:02:50> mirek2: :)
<19:02:58> thorsten: doesn't feel like a release if there's not a bit of stress ;-p
<19:03:05> astron247: hehe
<19:03:12> mirek2: :)
<19:04:31> mirek2: ok, that's it for branding, then
<19:04:41> mirek2: any other topics to discuss?
<19:05:06> alexanderw: Should I commit the gnome save icon?
<19:05:24> mirek2: we should revert to the old save icon for now
<19:05:37> mirek2: as well as the old save as and other save-related icons
<19:05:50> astron247: alexanderW: ill do the patch to revert the save icons now. (well not a real revert i guess, since its just some of the icons)
<19:06:45> alexanderw: the old save icon isn't the new gnome save icon,though, right?
<19:06:52> astron247: yes.
<19:07:54> alexanderw: why not use the new floppy icon?
<19:08:24> mirek2: because there's no "Save as" equivalent
<19:08:41> mirek2: (I believe we also have a Save all icon, but I'm not 100% sure)
<19:09:40> astron247: hm, yes, something like stacked diskettes, i believe..?
<19:10:12> alexanderw: manually add the textbox of the save-as icon?
<19:10:46> mirek2: since we're short on time, it'd be best to just use the old icon
<19:10:54> alexanderw: alright
<19:10:55> mirek2: (which really doesn't look that bad)
<19:11:04> mirek2: we can use the new icon in the new icon pack
<19:12:17> mirek2: any other topics to discuss?
<19:13:23> alexanderw: Should I commit recent changes to the icon theme to4.0?
<19:13:54> mirek2: you mean include tango_testing in 4.0?
<19:14:15> astron247: alexanderW: no. please dont try to
<19:14:18> alexanderw: Ah, I just found the email. Seems like the majority was against shipping it already
<19:15:30> astron247: if we have any more requests besides the two we have already for 4.0, developers will hit us hard on the head because were blocking reviews for other potentially worse bugs
<19:16:23> mirek2: btw, for the next release, I'd like to draw up a list of some UI easyhacks
<19:16:41> mirek2: I've started collecting ideas on my wiki page
<19:16:46> mirek2:
<19:16:57> alexanderw: 4.1.1 or 4.1?
<19:17:33> alexanderw: I believe the first one has already been fixed
<19:17:35> mirek2: I'd like to have them collected before 4.0.1
<19:17:53> alexanderw: ah, meant 4.0.1
<19:18:06> mirek2: alexanderW: possibly -- I have to check
<19:18:20> mirek2: of course, the time to fix them is anytime
<19:18:57> astron247: torsten: is there good way to make a partial revert?
<19:19:26> astron247: +h
<19:19:28> astron247: ugh
<19:23:39> alexanderw: thorsten ^
<19:30:42> mirek2: quesiton for Astron: is there a hard-coded place where the splash screen text is displayed?
<19:34:08> mirek2: actually, let me rephrase that
<19:35:04> mirek2: astron247: what position is the splash text displayed at, using what font and in which size, and which of these factors are you able to change?
<19:35:41> astron247: were definitely able to change the position, probably the colour, too.
<19:36:17> astron247: i think size & font are unchangeable. it should be dejavu sans, ~15px
<19:36:25> astron247: (regular)
<19:36:55> mirek2: ok
<19:37:30> mirek2: should we have a plan B in case we don't get Maxim's license statement?
<19:37:51> mirek2: (I don't think we even have his e-mail)
<19:38:06> astron247: we have mateus email...
<19:38:30> mirek2: right
<19:39:30> mirek2: since we're using his colors in the splash (even though really they're our brand colors), I'll ask him for a license statement too, and we'll go with his splash if we don't get Maxim's statement
<19:41:25> astron247: btw, look here: – i wonder if we could get the correct font (windows font here somehow – dejavu seems to be just the default here)
<19:43:23> mirek2: ok
<19:43:39> mirek2: I wouldn't mess with the font now
<19:44:01> astron247: sure
<19:44:11> mirek2: you're free to, though
<19:44:20> astron247: thanks.
<19:46:46> astron247: btw, you can check the windows splash, when youre running ./install/program/soffice (youll need to move or delete [1] your ~/.config/libreoffice folder first)

[1] easiest way, but you delete all your preferences etc. so... ymmv
<19:47:25> stevebell: sry have to run… have a nice evening...
<19:47:31> astron247: the ./inst... path is in your working directory of course
<19:47:33> astron247: bye
<19:48:20> mirek2: alright bye
<19:48:32> mirek2: astron247: alright, I'll try
<19:51:22> alexanderw: I have to leave, too
<19:51:26> alexanderw: See you
<19:51:45> mirek2: see you
<19:52:46> mirek2: astron, as you were here earlier than me, could you post the log?
<19:53:00> astron247: i will
<20:06:39> mirek2: edit of the proposed splash:
<20:06:59> mirek2: whoops, just noticed a slight problem
<20:09:27> mirek2: should be fixed now
<20:12:31> astron247: ok, looks good to me
<20:13:51> mirek2: ok, good
<20:14:12> astron247: there is a little problem at the lower left side of the splash, i think: the grey is too dark
<20:14:23> astron247: (just two pixels or so)
<20:15:53> mirek2: not sure what you mean
<20:16:30> astron247: wait a sec
<20:18:02> astron247:
<20:18:20> astron247: its actually just one pixel
<20:18:35> mirek2: sorry, I'll fix it
<20:18:41> astron247: no problem
<20:18:54> mirek2: (I've actually reused the PNG part)
<20:19:31> astron247: oh. you couldnt have redone it in svg?
<20:20:23> astron247: (i.e. doing a grey area + a gradient should be fairly simple, i guess)
<20:20:26> astron247: ..?
<20:21:35> mirek2: ok, i'll redo it
<20:26:13> astron247: (i hope im not bullying you...)
<20:26:20> mirek2: no, not at all
<20:27:01> mirek2: it's updated now, though the bottom gradient isn't 100% the same
<20:27:19> mirek2: it's a minor thing, though, and I don't think it's noticeable
<20:39:11> mirek2: there's enough space for the text, right?
<20:46:48> mirek2: about our license statement: should I ask for a dual MPL/LGPLv3+ license or a CC-BY license?
<20:48:02> mirek2: (I'm thinking probably the former, though as our icons are CC-by and CC is more appropriate for graphics, it might be good to gradually move to CC-by for all graphics?)
<20:54:23> astron247: sorry. was in my other account for a while to close everything & log out...
<20:55:11> astron247: new gradient seems fine to me
<20:57:06> astron247: the text would probably benefit from having a bit more space. but it is not really an option to tune the splash screen for the first start only. guess its fine.
<20:57:44> mirek2: ok
<20:57:55> mirek2: send to, right?
<20:58:02> astron247: i would ask for all three licenses. but that can seem a little much ...
<20:58:22> astron247: mirek2: the licenses?
<20:58:30> mirek2: yup
<20:58:43> mirek2: I'll just ask for the dual license
<20:58:45> astron247: absolutely
<20:59:29> mirek2: not sure CC makes that much sense, as this is artwork specifically for LibreOffice and nobody else will have any use for it
<20:59:32> astron247: if the license statement goes to the design list only, thats not so helpful (even if its archived)
<21:00:11> astron247: what ive been thinking ... how would you colour the progress metre?
<21:00:12> mirek2: don't need a subscription to send to, right?
<21:00:43> astron247: it helps (you dont have to be moderated in), but is not necessary, IIRC
<21:01:12> mirek2: right, thought so
<21:11:55> astron247: mirek2, can i have your opinion on whether or not the save icon looks too large now?
<21:12:06> astron247:
<21:17:38> mirek2: it does look a bit large
<21:19:30> mirek2: but it's acceptable
<21:20:31> astron247: ok
<21:21:04> astron247: ive just noticed that it uses the full 24*24 px, unlike the new icons which only use 22*22
<21:24:12> astron247: well, bye.