Re: GNOME Logo Font

[Máirín Duffy <duffy redhat com>]

On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 20:24 -0300, Steven Garrity wrote:
> M��Duffy wrote:
> > Here are different variations of it using vera:
> > http://www.linuxgrrl.com/gnome-logos/
> 
> While Vera is a good free font, it was not designed as a logo-type font. 
> Rather (I would imagine), it was designed to be a good general-purpose 
> screen and print front, similar to Verdana/Georgia from Microsoft.

Yep, although Trebuchet is technically in the same class [1]. (Although
I agree it does have a lot more personality than the others.) 

> I'm not sure we should be making changes to a coherent design element 
> (the current Gnome logo with wordmark) based on licensing issues.
> 
> Is it really a problem to have a proprietary font in the Gnome logo? In 
> the versions of the logo available in the wiki, the text element has 
> been converted to curves, so now it's really just SVG shapes.

Well, the reason I brought up the availability of Trebuchet at all is
that I'm in the process of developing some branding guidelines for the
GNOME logo, and I wanted to provide a template for creating GNOME
project logos (e.g., a logo for the GNOME Documentation project or Gnome
Women, etc.) where the project's name would be displayed underneath the
GNOME, in non-bold Trebuchet. (Logos just look more consistent when all
of the type elements use the same font.)

However, if Trebuchet is difficult to come by then I have a feeling the
guidelines won't be followed. Besides that, if Trebuchet is *the* GNOME
font, then wouldn't we want to use the font for poster headlines, etc.? 

A solution may be to find a more open secondary font to fill the above
roles and just leave Trebuchet for the "GNOME" letters.

~m

[1] http://www.microsoft.com/typography/web/fonts/trebuche/default.htm