You are covered in by the word mostly.
On 5/10/05, James Britt <james_b@neurogami.com> wrote:
gabriele renzi wrote:
> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon,How do you know that?
--
Tobi
http://www.snowdevil.ca - Snowboards that don't suck
http://www.hieraki.org - Open source book authoring
http://blog.leetsoft.com - Technical weblog
James Britt said:
> I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to Ruby
> itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know how I or
> anyone would really know that.The icon is striking and eyecatching, I tend to like it (at least how its
used on the page).My only comment is that I have never seen a picture of an actual ruby gem
in that particular shape. I've seen ovals, circles and pear shapes
(amoung others), but nothing in that red diamond shape.It probably doesn't matter, I doubt anybody really cares, but it does
bother me a bit.BTW, I'm no expert on gems. I'm just going on what I've seen by googling
the topic. I would be thrilled if someone pointed out that Rubies do
actually occur in that shape.
googled "ruby diamond cut". that first link looks like the "Lucky
Charms" page 
http://64.70.201.108/ruby-bands-new-10.jpg
On 5/10/05, Jim Weirich <jim@weirichhouse.org> wrote:
--
-- Jim Weirich jim@weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)
--
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)
gabriele renzi wrote:
James Britt ha scritto:
gabriele renzi wrote:
Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon,
How do you know that?
I don't I just noticed this was the one that was chosen for the second round of the redesign.
Sorry, then, I perhaps misunderstood who you thought was in agreement.
Basically, I think it's the half-dozen or so folks quietly working on that site.
I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to Ruby itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know how I or anyone would really know that.
And I really hope to steer clear of any sort of "official" Ruby logo.
I don't ever thought of an "official" logo.
True. That was my spin.
Notice I did not even said "logo" but "icon" on purpose since I liked the more logoish things in other designs
Same here.
There is obviously room for different images on the same theme (I think a common *theme* is cool, but obviously people will always remain free to use whatevere image they like)
I count on that.
James
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
Mark Hubbart, May 11:
One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
Then how about making the comment read “Ruby: Makes Programming Fun!”?,
nikolai
Simply open an new thread, [SLOGAN] ..., and ask the community to post a slogan.
Then collect the results on a wiki-page, thus anyone can review for some time.
..
Hi --
gabriele renzi wrote:
Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon, I think it would be
great to come up with some nice images to put on our own websites/blog.
I'm not just thinking of "ruby powered" images but also something like
"Ruby Developer", "I Love Ruby", "Ruby Contributor" and such on the lines
of the mono gif[1]. What do people think of this?This one has graphical problems and I know of them, but perhaps somebody from
the VI-Team would be able to take the idea and rework it consistently into
the style of the current gem graphic. I'm not sure what the exacts
requirements for being considered a "Ruby Hacker" would be (do we need them
at all?) but chris2 seems to have suggested that being in the change log or
not might be one.There's no requirement for being considered a Ruby hacker other than
that you be a Ruby hacker and want to call yourself that. (I usually
go with "Rubyist".) Or that you are not one but want people to think
you are
Woo hoo! I will experiment a bit and put out a couple t-shirt
designs. There is an 'official' ruby non-profit, right?
David
E
Le 10/5/2005, "David A. Black" <dblack@wobblini.net> a écrit:
On Wed, 11 May 2005, [ISO-8859-1] Florian Groß wrote:
--
I am a ruby hacker!
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
Mark Hubbart, May 11:
> One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".Then how about making the comment read "Ruby: Makes Programming Fun!"?,
+1 for "Makes Programming Fun"
Nikolai Weibull ha scritto:
Mark Hubbart, May 11:
One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
Then how about making the comment read “Ruby: Makes Programming Fun!”?,
nikolai
IMVVHO "Ruby: Fun Oriented Programming" is still the best
Hi --
On Wed, 11 May 2005, Paul Battley wrote:
Then how about making the comment read "Ruby: Makes Programming Fun!"?,
nikolaiIMVVHO "Ruby: Fun Oriented Programming" is still the best
Personally, I rather like the "best friend" slogan on the current
redesign, although I think it should be "The programmer's best friend"
rather than "A ~".
I agree. I actually think that while programming Ruby is indeed fun,
asserting "fun" can be a turn-off. Let people discover it themselves
David
--
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net
Oops. Before anyone gets confused and/or upset about the placement of
the previous reply in the thread, I feel I should preemptively
apologise and attempt to shift the blame entirely onto Gmail's
flattened threading display. 
Paul.
Paul Battley, May 11:
Personally, I rather like the "best friend" slogan on the current
redesign, although I think it should be "The programmer's best friend"
rather than "A ~".
No, no. The indefinite is definitely the way to go,
nikolai
--
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/\!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
Jason Foreman wrote:
Yea, I am not a fan of that logo either. I personally like Michel
Martens' version that looks like a red square with a thick red border
and the top-right corner is hacked off to give a sort of silhouette
of
a ruby. Not that John's isn't a lovely image however.
I like the gem logo. The square logo that you like looks sterile and
corporate to me. The site mockup that uses it doesn't look like the
home page of an open source programming language with a vibrant user
community; it looks like the corporate web page of RubySoft, Inc.
> John's image would also be a difficult one to reproduce nicely on
anything other than a computer screen, or at smaller sizes. It's got
that distinct Photoshop'd look to it.
Huh? What would you try to reproduce the image on, where it wouldn't
start out as a Photoshop file anyway? You want it on a piece of paper?
Print it out. You want it on a T-shirt or banner? Send the Photoshop
file to a print shop. The logo is all geometric shapes and gradient
fills. There's no reason the source image can't be vector-based instead
of pixel-based, and thus nicely scalable.
Check out some of the icons/logos/emblems/whatever used at the top of
these other open source project web pages. None of them are flat,
simple geometric shapes, and I'm sure they've all been
reproduced on T-shirts and trade show banners.
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
Mark Hubbart, May 11:
> One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
Then how about making the comment read "Ruby: Makes Programming
Fun!"?,
Or how about "Ruby: Rediscover the Joy of Programming"
Jim Weirich wrote:
BTW, I'm no expert on gems. I'm just going on what I've seen by googling
the topic. I would be thrilled if someone pointed out that Rubies do
actually occur in that shape.
It's called brilliant cut:
http://google.com/search?q=ruby+brilliant
Although what we are using is a simplified version of it.
--
John Long
http://wiseheartdesign.com
Christian Neukirchen ha scritto:
Florian Groß <florgro@gmail.com> writes:
gabriele renzi wrote:
Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon, I think it
would be great to come up with some nice images to put on our own
websites/blog.
I'm not just thinking of "ruby powered" images but also something
like "Ruby Developer", "I Love Ruby", "Ruby Contributor" and such on
the lines of the mono gif[1]. What do people think of this?This one has graphical problems and I know of them, but perhaps
somebody from the VI-Team would be able to take the idea and rework it
consistently into the style of the current gem graphic. I'm not sure
what the exacts requirements for being considered a "Ruby Hacker"
would be (do we need them at all?) but chris2 seems to have suggested
that being in the change log or not might be one.That was not referring to "Ruby Hacker", but to "Ruby Core
Contributor", which Gabriele proposed. Those are not mutually
exclusive, of course.Still, I'd probably not set up any requirements at all... if one
claims he's a Ruby Hacker, but didn't write a single line of code yet,
so what?
my exact thought, thanks for making it clear
I have a friend who is a jeweller. She has told me that the diamond
cut is the most common cut, followed by the square cut.
-austin
On 5/10/05, Jim Weirich <jim@weirichhouse.org> wrote:
James Britt said:
> I find the literal gem image boring and impractical (in contrast to Ruby
> itself), and I may in fact be in the minority, but I don't know how I or
> anyone would really know that.
BTW, I'm no expert on gems. I'm just going on what I've seen by googling
the topic. I would be thrilled if someone pointed out that Rubies do
actually occur in that shape.
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca
Hi James,
We kind of made our work based on our ideas and the feedback we've got
on the first round, but that doesn't mean that we will impose that
logo or that we all think it's perfect. In fact, I'm glad a lot of
people is participating right now and I liked to read your opinion, as
it all adds for a better outcome.
Michel.
On 5/10/05, James Britt <james_b@neurogami.com> wrote:
gabriele renzi wrote:
> James Britt ha scritto:
>
>> gabriele renzi wrote:
>>
>>> Now that there is (mostly) agreement on a ruby icon,
>>
>>
>>
>> How do you know that?
>
>
> I don't I just noticed this was the one that was chosen for the second
> round of the redesign.Sorry, then, I perhaps misunderstood who you thought was in agreement.
Basically, I think it's the half-dozen or so folks quietly working on
that site.
Ilias Lazaridis, May 11:
Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> Mark Hubbart, May 11:
> > One of the major tenets of Ruby is that it "makes coding fun".
> Then how about making the comment read “Ruby: Makes Programming
> Fun!”?,
Simply open an new thread, [SLOGAN] ..., and ask the community to post
a slogan.
Then collect the results on a wiki-page, thus anyone can review for
some time.
please note:
The new [slogan] will not [be] selected by democracy (vote).
It results out of research, reasoning and rationality.
Or?,
nikolai
--
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/\!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
gabriele renzi, May 11:
IMVVHO "Ruby: Fun Oriented Programming" is still the best
That’d be “Ruby: Fun-Oriented Programming” actually. Perhaps this
spin-off is viable as well: “Ruby: Putting The ‘Fun’ In Object-Oriented
Programming”. This would be a reference to the “putting the ‘fun’ in
functional programming”-type comment about functional programming
languages,
nikolai
--
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/\!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
Exactly. If you need to say that something is fun, experience says
that it usually isn't!
Paul.
On 11/05/05, David A. Black <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:
I agree. I actually think that while programming Ruby is indeed fun,
asserting "fun" can be a turn-off. Let people discover it themselves
Karl, those are examples of bad logos. The Ruby gem is infinitely
better than that.
Besides: I don't think that all open source projects should look
alike, and good design can be found in projects like Firefox, Mozilla
(http://www.mozilla.org), PostgreSQL (http://www.postgresql.org/\),
WordPress (http://wordpress.org/\), etc.
Michel.
On 5/11/05, Karl von Laudermann <doodpants@mailinator.com> wrote:
Check out some of the icons/logos/emblems/whatever used at the top of
these other open source project web pages. None of them are flat,
simple geometric shapes, and I'm sure they've all been
reproduced on T-shirts and trade show banners.
http://www.freebsd.org/
http://www.linux.org/
http://www.gimp.org/
http://www.opendarwin.org/