Changes between Version 12 and Version 13 of org/teams/UxTeam/StyleGuidelines


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Sep 22, 2016, 9:17:39 PM (2 years ago)
Author:
philipl
Comment:

Added feedback from internal mails, mailing-list and meet-up.

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • org/teams/UxTeam/StyleGuidelines

    v12 v13  
    6767
    6868'''Step 5''': Make sure that new projects know of the guide, and that new Tier 1 projects start out using it from the beginning
     69
     70== Collected feedback: ==
     71
     72 - '''Existing Inconsistence:''' It needs to be clarified more precisely where we are inconsistent beyond the fact that stem.torproject.org and torproject.org don't look the same. Elio pointed to the existing variety of logos, colors and fonts being used for tor-related media. Furthermore, Orfox is violating Mozilla trademarks by using and remixing the Firefox logo (we need to change that asap). There are other small inconsistencies which need to be updated.
     73
     74 - '''App Icons vs. Subbrand Logos:''' There is a confusion about the subbrand logos, which are not app icons. When to use the subbrand logo then in case a product icon exists? Where does it replace existing subbrand logos?
     75
     76 - '''Subbrands: Who Must, Should, Can Use The Guide?:''' Historically there has been confusion about what is allowed to be “official Tor” with things like Ricochet or Stem as examples. Sub-projects were encouraged to avoid use of the official tor logo and this has caused them to adopt iconography of their own. How will the roll-out plan clarify the priorities. For example: user installable software should be consistent. Dev tools are potentially secondary. Long standing challenge: some projects want to be separate, and some want to be official. What about language like: “Powered by Tor?” with categories: 1) Tor endorsed, paid staff 2) Tor community, volunteer-driven. Tor Labs? 3) Powered by Tor, but totally separate. Consider how to clarify membership in which group via the Style guide. Examples: Whonix and TAILS aren’t endorsed by Tor.
     77
     78 - '''Tier 1 vs 2:''' Confusions about subdividing projects into tiers were clarified as milestones for the UX team that need to be defined in conversation with the whole community at the dev meeting in Seattle 2016.
     79
     80 - '''Subbrands: Logo Aesthetics:''' Replacing existing logos might not go without resistance as some projects have nice logos that can't compete with the design of the proposed subbrand logo. Examples: Stem, Ooni, Metrics. Isabela stated that the guideline is a living document. The sub-projects logos can be improved based on the feedback we get.
     81
     82 - '''Internationalization: Fonts For Non-Latin Scripts:''' There is a need for defining preferred fonts for Arabic, Cyrillic, Chinese, Japanese etc. It is added that for internationalization we should also have a font-size specification for minimum font sizes.
     83
     84 - '''Typography:''' It is asked whether there are reusable implementations of the style guide, e.g. CSS stylesheets.
     85
     86 - '''Documentation to Explain Rationale:''' There is an interest for „scientific evidence” in the documentation. We already clarified that this is not typically in design, because many design decisions depend on its context and there is never only one best solution. Nevertheless designers justify decisions with rationales that we can document without references.
     87
     88 - '''Extent Of The Style Guide:''' There is a confusion about the name “style guide”, because for now it only concentrates on the basic elements (“logo guideline”). Isabela clarified that besides the logo usage it also contains colors and fonts. The document is described as limited. Further changes proposed by the UX team are still unclear, so it is expected to run with this for a few projects to see how it goes.
     89
     90 - '''Branding/Rebranding:''' As the style guide is still very basic, there is a need to define more elements–especially for layouts where the core elements are in use, e. g. the website or presentation sheets. Philip described the need for a redesign, because the lack of quality affects further designs. The actual necessity needs to be discussed. Officials from the tor team need to get involved.