I would like to have a page and rules like https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Secondary_trademark_usage_guidelines for this, too.

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v01.svg

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v01.png

Matthew,

Is this something like what you had in mind? (see v01, attached to this ticket)

Palmer

Yeah, that's definitely in line with what I was thinking. What does it look like if the Playground stamp is a little smaller relative to "Fedora"?

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v02.svg

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v02.png

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v03.svg

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v03.png

attachment
fedora_playground_pandas.svg

attachment
fedora_playground_pandas.png

Matthew,

If we reduce the size of the "playground" stamp by 40%, we get v02.

If we reduce "playground" further so that it fits under "fedora" -- like the Fedora Remix logo set -- we get v03.

While I was at it, I put a pair of Fedora's panda mascots on a piece of playground equipment and attached them to this ticket as well. Enjoy!

Palmer

Nice! I like both of v2 and v3. What about a slightly larger "playground" in v3, so it balances "fedora" a bit more? (Maybe keep the letters aligned and allow the box to extend further to the edges?)

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v04.svg

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v04.png

How's this? (v04)

Palmer

Yes, that's definitely what I meant. Hmmmm. I'm not sure which I like better, after all. What's your opinion?

attachment
fedora_playground_logo_v04a.svg

attachment

I think your visual instinct was accurate: version 04 offers the best balance between the respective weights of "fedora" and "playground." It also offers better readability in multiple sizes and contexts. And as much as I want to avoid symmetrical composition as a designer, keeping the type level and centered really does work better.

I've uploaded a tweaked version (v04a) that should be suitable for most purposes.

You mentioned creating a design usage guide similar to the one for the Remix logo set. I'm willing to put something together, but I don't currently have write/edit access to the wiki. I'm going to see if I can join one of the groups that will give me that access.

Other than the logo and usage guide, do you need any other branding assets for Playground?

Palmer

Hey Palmer, Maria had the point on this one (we're in ticket triage during the meeting now) that the red color has the connotation of something being canceled or invalid. It's also not one of our brand colors. Could you swap it for the fedora magenta color in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Logo/UsageGuidelines ? That would help it be more on brand I think.

i think i would also add just a tad more breathing space between the main fedora logo and the playground logo (see the logo clear spcae guidelines in the same wiki page mentioned above.)

I will also say - and wish I had said this upfront, sorry - we generally follow these guidelines for creating secondary Fedora guidelines:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Logo/UsageGuidelines#Fedora_Sub-Logos:_Standard_uses_of_the_Fedora_Logo_with_other_elements

So I'm personally not sure I'm 100% ok with introducing something outside of those guidelines into the mix of our branding...

I understand the rationale behind it not being an applicatoin or group, but it may be more appropriate to follow the newer web app guidelines we're rolling out now (conveniently not documented, sorry) BUt see the pagure logo above? With the snail shell logo mark? And the fedora logotype, then the app name in Montserrat.... that might be a better approach and if whatever website gets deployed to serve as a directory of these projects, it'll better match the look and feel of other fedora apps.

So I think the challenge here would be to get a logo mark design that follows that trend. The pagure shell is one, there is also a hyperkitty one -

http://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2016/03/24/a-new-logo-for-hyperkitty/

So those are two examples of the style to follow. What do you think? I like the pandas on the seesaw, maybe an iconic seesaw following the pagure / hyperkitty graphical style and color palette for the mark?

Thanks for your feedback, Mo. I'm definitely looking for something stronger in distinction than the normal sub-logo. There's a different meaning. This won't be a sub-project or application in itself, but rather a label that can be used for projects or applications. Making it have the same visual style seems like it adds confusion there. I wasn't thinking about having a directory page — that's not a bad idea, but I don't want to convey the idea that any such directory is the Playground itself.

Additionally, I expect applications and projects to display this logo themselves somewhere. If it looks the same as an application/project logo, that might cause confusion over which is the app/project and which is this designation.

Hi Matthew, in the same vein though, projects on pagure (honestly any repo with development code) could certainly be of an experimental / not ready for prime time nature, yet pagure has a subproject logo and the Fedora logotype is embedded in it, but it still fits within the Fedora brand system.

Do you have concrete examples (I don't see any in the mailing list ref but thank you for providing it) for what type of projects would be under this umbrella so I can think this through better?

@duffy @mattdm I'm willing to make necessary revisions or even start over completely. Just waiting for the outcome of this conversation. -Palmer

Hi Matthew, in the same vein though, projects on pagure (honestly any repo with development code) could certainly be of an experimental / not ready for prime time nature, yet pagure has a subproject logo and the Fedora logotype is embedded in it, but it still fits within the Fedora brand system.

I must not be communicating the concept very clearly here. Pagure is itself an application; having an application hosted on Pagure does not say anything about the application itself.

Do you have concrete examples (I don't see any in the mailing list ref but thank you for providing it) for what type of projects would be under this umbrella so I can think this through better?

Pagure itself might have been one — or maybe it still will be. In general anything that might now get the ".fedorainfracould.org" domain instead of .fedoraproject.org would fit. (In fact, we have fedoraplayground.org and it might replace that for that purpose.) Copr would definitely apply. But not just web apps and services — the initial version of Atomic seems like it would have been a good use case, and for that matter SCLs. We might want to apply it to the Atomic-based Fedora workstation and the initial Modularity work.

All that said, we might want both a logo in the standard scheme to put at the top of the page documenting what this is all about (or at the top of the directory-of-such-projects idea, if we do that).

Mo, does what I'm saying make sense? What's our path forward here?

If I were to turn the pandas+seesaw graphic into a silhouette, and conform the logotype to existing assets, it might look something like this.

Just trying to help move the conversation forward.

Palmer

Hey sorry this one didn't come up in triage last meeting - I think a good way forward here would just to chat about it in live instead of ticket tag. I'll try to hit you up in IRC and provide the summary here.

I met with @mattdm a week or so ago. Here are my notes from that and my understanding of Fedora Playground as a result:

Fedora Playground is a program that people enroll their projects in. It is a way of signifying that something is welcome within the Fedora space, while trying to keep the primary brand strong. It is a way to designate that the project bearing the mark, while perfectly 'Fedora' otherwise, isn't production-ready or supported, an is out there for you to play with and test.

Examples of projects that could fall under Fedora playground:
- The Fedora Jenkins Instance
- Peter's IOT work
- SCLs
- The experimental Fedora App
- Fedora Hubs (while not in production)
- It can apply to web apps or to Fedora images or both
- Copr itself could fall under Fedora playground, and projects on Copr could fall under Fedora playground
- For now, the scope is code / development projects. Community / social projects probably would not be part of Fedora Playground. So this means anything from a Fedora package, to a Fedora respin/image, to a web app, to a mobile app.

What is the difference between Fedora Remixes and Fedora Playground?
- Fedora remixes can include code that isn't in the Fedora pkg universe and would never be eligible for the Fedora pkg universe
- Playground projects can use code from outside of the Fedora pkg universe as long as it could be included according to our guidelines and it's only a matter of someone packaging it up and not a conflict with our guidelines.

What benefits do projects get from enrolling in Fedora Playground - what is the motivation to be involved?
- Some things might become official - they could incubate inside of the project rather than completely outside, allowing for an easier "graduation"
- Projects can make use of Fedora resources, including our infrastructure (e.g., infra cloud)
- Some things might stay in the playground forever bc they fill a need adequately and no one has resource / energy / interest to take it further

As a logo mark, Fedora Playground should be similar to the Gmail beta label. This should probably be a logo system, with a different form of the mark depending on the type of project the label applies to:
- a logo mark to be put on the media sleeve for an image
- maybe a specific string to be put in the ISO file name
- maybe an icon to be placed next to the download link (not actually technically feasible / too expensive)
- a 'corner banner' (eg like "fork on Github") for upstream project pages
- a small banner to be used on the footer of web applications
- some kind of mark or designation that could be mixed with the upstream project logo

Okay, I have an initial proposal.

First, here's the sketches I started with:

Here's the proposal. You can see it's not just a single logo but a "system" of sorts.

Source for proposal:

![playground-sketch.svg]

@mattdm ^^ lemme know what you think

I like the idea of the system, and I like the slide quite a lot. The version with words looks good, but feels like it has a little bit too much separation between the letters of "play", and I can't help but reading "P-L-A-Y ground". Or, worse, because play is separated, it's easy to read as "Fedora Ground (PLAY)

So the idea behind having the letters separated on colorful overlapping balls is to evoke a sense of play :) things in the playground arent always neat and orderly, they can be a bit messy.

What do you think at a bit higher level as to the concept of the colored balls and the overall feel? The minor nits can be addressed with tweaks.

Actually scratch that, I think I'll try something quite a bit different and see whre it goes.

Any further thoughts, @duffy ?

I haven't forgotten about this, just a bit stuck and overloaded on other tasks.

One of the things I didn't see (at first) in the sketches or anywhere, was the idea of a swing set. It seems universal that swings are similar, but not the same. Sometimes you jump off a swing, and bail out. Other times, you get to ride the swing for a while, then move onto something else in the playground.

I doubt my artistic skill is up to snuff, but here's a concept of what I was kind of thinking. Add a couple people/pandas swinging, and you have something, maybe? Hopefully, this helps spark something.

herlo

Everything done so far is very interesting. Anyway I think that to name a site of experimentation and innovation is a little childish to call it "Playground" I think it would be more appropriate to call it Fedora Garage (or something similar as workshop, studio...) With this we remember the garage as a place where ideas are generated, Where large companies and projects are born. A place of experimentation.
If this concept likes, it would have to design a logo more in the line of this.
I attach some images that I used to make a video that can illustrate what I comment.
https://kn3.net/61778FD0A68PNG.html

"Garage" has its own downsides. I'd like to go ahead with Playground.

Perfect, it was just a suggestion.

What about something like this -- I think it's playful to exit the confines of the circle (sort of a 'color outside the lines' thing). I also like that it's a little unstable (i.e. experimental). Don't think this is complete by any means.

@duffy has this idea in the rocket on her sketch. Maybe panda's are not necessary. I kind of like that the future (rocket, pointed skyward) is a little shaky. Advancement comes out of play. Is it anti-fedora design to have a sketchy, unfinished feel for something like this? That communicates instability and play as well.

Mo, any further thoughts? What do you think of the "spring" concepts above? I'm not sure how I feel; I kind of like the rocket one, but not sure it conveys much without some accompanying words.

This is a little board I put together with examples of how you can compose different logos together - food for thought -

Just screwing around...

svg src

I'm a sucker for the rocket and the spring, but I really like it -- even more so in monochrome.

Okay, so, in talking about this with the Fedora Council, it became clear that I'm not able to explain the idea here clearly to anyone, even though it makes total sense to me. This is probably an indication that the whole idea needs some work. We're going to mothball it for now.