Jean,
Logos and branding can be a very emotional
subject. I understand that people want to create an identity for the
components that they are developing. However, from an outsider perspective it
can create a lot of confusion and creates a perception that each component is an
individual discrete solution. Something I don’t think you want to convey
on the modeling project.
Ian
From:
jbezivin@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:jbezivin@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jean Bezivin
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007
1:42 PM
To: Ed Merks
Cc: ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx;
PMC members mailing list; Bjorn Freeman-Benson;
modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc]
feedback on GMT web site
I believe this is going much too far.
When the ATL (AMW, TCS, etc.) logos were defined for
the sole purpose of Eclipse component identification,
I considered this as a very positive initiative.
I really do not understand the rationale for this radical position.
In my mind it is going to be VERY STRONGLY counter productive
and will discourage a lot of good willing contributions.
On 10/19/07, Ed
Merks <merks@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Ian,
I don't really agree with your take on this. We have lots of nice logos and
I'd not want to give up my EMF one:
http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/images/modeling_pos_logo_fc_med.jpg
http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/emf/images/emf_logo.png
http://www.eclipse.org/gmf/images/logo_banner.png
I'm not sure how many of the logos on the GMT page are non-Eclipse in
nature and that would be somewhat my concern:
http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/download/
But I personally think the ATL logo is a very nice Eclipse-branded logo
that helps to build up the repertoir of Eclipse bands and trademarks:
http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/resources/ATL_Logo_Text.png
It's certainly important to have better integration between projects, I
heard that message loud and clear at ESE and we are lacking in this area,
but diversity also has great value and allowing folks their own space in
which to exist seems necessary to foster that...
Consider projects too like RAP:
http://www.eclipse.org/rap/
There isn't even an attempt to define what Ajax means. It's even lost the
capitalization that you'd expect from an acryonym. For
example, ifRAP is
fine (http://www.eclipse.org/rap/),
it seems kind of a double standard to
say ATL is not.
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
"Ian
Skerrett"
<ian.skerrett@ecl
ipse.org> To
Sent
by: "'Jean
Bezivin'"
modeling-pmc-boun
< Jean.Bezivin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
ces@xxxxxxxxxxx
"'PMC members mailing list'"
<
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
10/19/2007
01:12 "'Bjorn
Freeman-Benson'"
PM <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject
Please
respond to RE: [modeling-pmc]
feedback on GMT
ian.skerrett@ecli
web site
pse.org; Please
respond to
PMC members
mailing
list
<modeling-pmc@ecl
ipse.org>
What I would suggest is that the components of GMT should not have a
logo/graphic and have a descriptive name not a nickname. I think this
would go a long way to improving the situation. Btw, this goes for all
the modeling sub-projects, for instance http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/
Having all these different logos in my opinion conveys a perception that
there is no strategy or integration between the components or the projects.
My 2 cents?.
Ian
From: jbezivin@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:jbezivin@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jean
Bezivin
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:48 PM
To: PMC members mailing list
Cc: ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx;
Bjorn Freeman-Benson;
modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] feedback on GMT web site
I agree with you.
I also agree that we have to improve much the organization of GMT.
For oAW matters, I will transmit these remarks to Markus Voelter.
I will discuss with him directly next week at OOPSLA because
he will be there.
Bjorn, will you be at OOPSLA and if yes would it be possible
to have a short meeting with Markus to stress the importance
of what has been said?
Best regards,
Jean
On 10/19/07, Ed Merks <merks@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Ian,
I'll draw Nick's attention to that link gone astray...
I agree with you. As the various parts of the oAW technology are
incorporated into the other projects, like Xpand into M2T and MWE into
EMFT, I'll ask folks to avoid any non-Eclipse branding on the
site. You
won't find IBM/Rational branding nor Borland branding at Eclipse, so we
ought not be to seeing anything that isn't part of Eclipse's branding.
We'll queue up this topic for discussion at the next PMC meeting.
It would be good to improve GMT's image as well. What are your
thoughts on
this Jean?
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
"Ian
Skerrett"
<
ian.skerrett@ecl
ipse.org> To
Sent
by: <
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx >
modeling-pmc-boun cc
ces@xxxxxxxxxxx
"'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'"
< bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
10/19/2007
12:06 [modeling-pmc]
feedback on GMT web
PM site
Please respond to
ian.skerrett@ecli
pse.org; Please
respond
to
PMC
members
mailing list
<modeling-pmc@ecl
ipse.org>
Modeling PMC,
Today, I was looking at the open Achitectureware project and in general the
GMT project. I don?t usually provide feedback on project specific
branding and marketing but I thought compelled to do so in this case.
IMHO, from a branding and marketing perspective, the open Architectureware
project looks out of place in the context of the Eclipse community.
They
essentially look like they have parachuted in their existing project into
an Eclipse project web page. They actually also seem to have another
project web site http://www.openarchitectureware.org/. I
find it all very
confusing and probably detrimental to the Eclipse brand.
If I look at the GMT site, it seems like the open architectureware scenario
plays out again and again. I see lots of project logos and cool
names
that seem to have very little to do with Eclipse? The perception I
am left
with is that GMT is hovering up existing modeling projects but not really
integrating them into Eclipse? I think what you are doing is
creating an
incubator for new modeling projects, which is great, but in my opinion what
you are communicating is something very different and will hurt the
perception of the overall modeling project.
As I said, I usually don?t provide this type of feedback but in this case I
just had to say something. I?d be happy to discuss further and if
you
want.
Btw, when I went to try to find the PMC mailing list, the link on this page
http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/
points to
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/emft-dev
Ian
Ian Skerrett
Director of Marketing
Eclipse Foundation
613-224-9461 ext. 227
blog: ianskerrett.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
--
__________________________________
Jean Bézivin - ATLAS Group (INRIA & LINA) - University of Nantes - 2, rue
de la Houssinière
44322 Nantes cedex 3 - France
tel. +33 2 51 12 58 13 - fax. +33 2 51 12 58 12 - cell.+33 6 14 32 22 36
- e.mail: Jean.Bezivin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/lina/atl/
- Skype: jbezivin
---------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
--
__________________________________
Jean Bézivin - ATLAS Group (INRIA & LINA) - University of Nantes - 2, rue de la Houssinière
44322 Nantes cedex 3 - France
tel. +33 2 51 12 58 13 - fax. +33 2 51 12 58 12 - cell.+33 6 14 32 22 36
- e.mail: Jean.Bezivin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/lina/atl/
- Skype: jbezivin
---------------------------------------
|
