17:08:25 <isabela> #startmeeting
17:08:25 <MeetBot> Meeting started Thu Apr  7 17:08:25 2016 UTC.  The chair is isabela. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:08:25 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:08:31 <Sebastian> I think we mentioned some answers to the open questions last meeting
17:08:54 <Sebastian> We should decide whether we think they're conclusive and sufficient and if so move on?
17:08:59 <Sebastian> is my suggestion^
17:09:08 <isabela> #item link to wiki updated by scouttle https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/UxTeam
17:09:26 <isabela> #item url for creative brief https://github.com/simplysecure/tor/blob/master/CreativeBriefforTorProjectStyleGuide.pdf
17:10:22 <isabela> Sebastian: yes, I was thinking of documenting them to be able to say 'this is the answer' and decide on that
17:10:24 <scouttle> #item url for etherpad with styleguide notes https://storm.torproject.org/shared/A4w1l5pDZZZPU2wKiYWo1JjWoCK3b4APPfAssHctsRR
17:10:40 <dcf1> thanks scouttle, was looking for that :)
17:11:30 <scouttle> re: open questions... right now I think it would still be valuable to get tor staffers to weigh in on the ones reflected in the creative brief doc (https://github.com/simplysecure/tor/blob/master/CreativeBriefforTorProjectStyleGuide.pdf)
17:12:25 <PhilipL> i agree with that
17:12:32 <scouttle> I mention this to address Sebastian's query about whether questions are still open :)
17:13:09 <dcf1> scouttle: do you mean you are looking for opinions of tor staffers who aren't on the ux team?
17:13:13 <Sebastian> My answers last time definitely count into that column (I would say), but probably we should get other voices
17:13:14 <dcf1> Do we need to put out a wider notice?
17:13:21 <Envite__> What about open/closed logos, signs and branding?
17:13:24 <scouttle> yes, more voices would be good
17:13:31 <isabela> dcf1: maybe email tor-internal?
17:13:45 <isabela> or tor-project
17:13:57 <dcf1> or tor-project :)
17:13:57 <Envite__> I think I put that on pad
17:14:05 <ame_e> What does open/closed mean in this context?
17:14:24 <Sebastian> in the context of "this is official" or "this is the community logo"
17:14:26 <isabela> dcf1: :)
17:14:41 <Sebastian> like, official logo is for accredited purposes only
17:14:53 <scouttle> ah, this is an interesting question
17:15:11 <Sebastian> Debian has the interesting situation where they have two logos
17:15:19 <Sebastian> and only the community logo sees much use :)
17:15:39 <scouttle> I think in initial conversations with isabela and mrphs, we had thought to limit the scope of the styleguide to official tor stuff (ie website and slides and letterhead)
17:15:50 <scouttle> because there are many different tor-affiliated logos in the tor community
17:16:14 <Sebastian> I think that's a good initial focus.
17:17:01 <ame_e> Makes sense.
17:17:12 <scouttle> so, under that framing, the style guide would not address whether the logo was to be or not be used for broader community purposes
17:17:27 <scouttle> is there any convention of certain logos being used or not used for certain purposes?
17:17:49 <scouttle> or is it culturally accepted for anyone to use any version of the tor logo for anything?
17:17:52 <Sebastian> in theory nobody is supposed to use the logo without asking
17:17:55 <PhilipL> for tor? i guess not.
17:18:07 <Envite_> But maybe the guide needs to address how to differentiate
17:18:08 <Sebastian> it's a trademark issue afaiui, but I don't understand it well.
17:18:19 <armadev> https://www.torproject.org/docs/trademark-faq.html.en#onionlogo
17:18:34 <armadev> i am unable to keep up with all the words here but i can answer questions about the tor logo and its use
17:18:35 <PhilipL> i wouldnt have expected that the logo isnt open source
17:18:52 <Envite_> I thought on Debian's way: bottle logo is only for official products
17:19:21 <scouttle> thank you for the link, armadev!
17:19:21 <armadev> in short, you can use the tor logo for education, but not for branding
17:19:35 <scouttle> that is very helpful
17:20:09 <isabela> we have this policy in our site
17:20:27 <scouttle> so, I think that it sounds like having the style guide address the logo-useage policy is a good idea
17:20:31 <PhilipL> i doubt that this is necessary or even manageable having two logos. or let’s say, what reasons would speak on behalf of that? Ensure a certain quality for official stuff?
17:20:42 <scouttle> it's not clear that version 1.0 of the style guide needs to include it, though
17:20:56 <scouttle> and +1 to PhillipL's observations on manageability of two logos
17:21:09 <scouttle> sorry, PhilipL's :)
17:21:10 <weasel> the logo should be available under a Free License.
17:21:33 <isabela> https://www.torproject.org/docs/trademark-faq.html.en
17:21:34 <armadev> the tor logo is cc-by. but also we have a trademark on it.
17:21:36 <weasel> [iirc, the current one is.]
17:21:55 <armadev> (creative commons attribution)
17:21:56 <Envite-> Free License doesn't mean trademark giveaway
17:22:44 <PhilipL> right, as i understood, for now version 1.0 aims at official stationery, so it is not for comminity stuff yet
17:23:19 <scouttle> PhilipL that's what has been proposed, pending endorsement here
17:23:34 <scouttle> I think that keeping the scope small will help us actually land it quickly
17:23:54 <scouttle> I think the style guide should link to the FAQ listed above
17:24:07 <scouttle> and potentially incorporate some of the guidance offered therein
17:25:03 <isabela> scouttle: +1
17:25:20 <ame_e> Makes sense. I hope that the styleguide feels familiar in the end.
17:25:42 <isabela> starting with a familiar point is good
17:25:43 <PhilipL> havent read the whole FAQ but seems to be a good idea linking it
17:26:38 <scouttle> down the road if we want to offer guidelines around different logos for use by different parts of the community, I think that's a good idea
17:26:58 <scouttle> (and I like how Debian does it!)
17:27:00 <scouttle> but step 0 is creating a standard around the stuff we already have
17:27:25 <scouttle> so, hearing no objections...
17:27:47 <scouttle> there were a couple of other threads on the mailing lists where folks with an obvious background in design and/or branding were weighing in
17:27:51 <Envite--> E.g. I'm thinking on a personal website about Tor. Could I use in that context the normal logo?
17:28:12 <PhilipL> yes, having different logos or logo adaptions gives orientation. though it might not be the most practicable way for a community
17:28:33 <Envite--> Maybe the official-only logo wold be a new one
17:28:48 <PhilipL> „If you're making non-commercial use of Tor software, you may also use the Tor onion logo (as an illustration, not as a brand for your products).“
17:29:14 <scouttle> Envite-- I don't think the plan is to create an "official-only" logo at this point, per se
17:29:38 <scouttle> I think the plan is to 1) create guidelines on how to visually use the existing logos
17:29:49 <Sebastian> right
17:29:52 <scouttle> (i.e., how far should they be spaced from text or the edge of the page, what are the exact colors, etc.)
17:30:07 <Sebastian> also, we're running short on time for our meeting
17:30:20 <scouttle> 2) and maybe if we have budget, refine the logos a little bit to make sure they work at different sizes etc (which I still need to add to the creative brief)
17:30:21 <scouttle> indeed
17:30:23 <PhilipL> are there different logos yet? i see them more like different versions of the same
17:30:38 <scouttle> yup, there are just different versions of the same ones
17:30:57 <scouttle> since we're short on time, perhaps we can table for now and continue over email?
17:31:06 <isabela> yes
17:31:13 <scouttle> are there any folks who wanted to discuss items brought up over email, or bring up new items for discussion?
17:31:15 <PhilipL> ok
17:31:22 <isabela> I also will follow up over email on a draft to send to tor-project
17:31:25 <isabela> dcf1: ^^
17:32:40 <isabela> ok i will end the bot then
17:32:44 <isabela> #endmeeting