What about keeping "SUPPORTED" around the top and changing to
"DEMONSTRATION" around the bottom? Also, I think it would be more usual for the
bottom text to read left-to-right as well (rather than continuing clockwise around the
edge).
Alternatives to DEMONSTRATION, if that's too formal/awkward:
- DEMO APP
- DEMOWARE
- EXAMPLE
-Jonathan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rafael Benevides" <benevides(a)redhat.com>
To: jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 3:34:15 PM
Subject: Re: [jdf-dev] Looking for a (visual) metaphor
Any other word except supported sounds strange :/
Em 30-08-2012 15:59, Jason Porter escreveu:
Ratified and Sanctioned are interesting, not sure if we'd want to
use them, but they sound nice :)
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sande Gilda"<sgilda(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Pete Muir"<pmuir(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Jason Porter"<jporter(a)redhat.com>, jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 8:40:32 AM
> Subject: Re: [jdf-dev] Looking for a (visual) metaphor
>
> Does anything here sound good?
>
http://thesaurus.com/browse/endorsed?s=t
>
>
> On 08/30/2012 09:37 AM, Pete Muir wrote:
>> Supported is a massively overloaded word ;-)
>>
>> On 29 Aug 2012, at 22:56, Jason Porter wrote:
>>
>>> Endorsed to me means something slightly different than supported.
>>> Supported to me would be either we created or we test and can fix
>>> it if something goes wrong. Endorsed would be we've gone through
>>> it and approve of everything in there, but we're not "offering
>>> support" for it. I would use "endorsed" for community
contributed
>>> things (examples, guides, etc) and supported for things we
>>> authored internally or have taken over the ownership.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Pete Muir"<pmuir(a)redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Max Rydahl Andersen"<max.andersen(a)redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 3:41:22 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [jdf-dev] Looking for a (visual) metaphor
>>>>
>>>> I like Endorsed
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> On 29 Aug 2012, at 13:03, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> we actually have the exact same challenge in tooling land - the
>>>>> trouble of classifying what "status"
>>>>> an external plugin has for us/users.
>>>>>
>>>>> We currently use the term "Certified" and
"Selected" as the way
>>>>> to
>>>>> say which we support/can help fix things on and "selected"
being
>>>>> those
>>>>> we at least tested at some point but might have changed since
>>>>> then.
>>>>>
>>>>> /max
>>>>>
>>>>> On 29 Aug 2012, at 13:58, Pete Muir<pmuir(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> James P has started to develop some designs for this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <JDFApproved3.jpg>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I really like the bottom left (though it's possible that
>>>>>> supported
>>>>>> is not the right term, perhaps "Recommended" or
"Certified" is
>>>>>> better?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10 Jul 2012, at 16:08, Marius Bogoevici wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Exactly why I like Jason's proposal of using the JDF
logo
>>>>>>> explicitly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2012-07-10, at 11:07 AM, Pete Muir wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well we want to rate them based on their level of
>>>>>>>> affiliation,
>>>>>>>> not on their quality or difficulty.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10 Jul 2012, at 16:04, Marius Bogoevici wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Something based on the JDF logo would be better. I
don't
>>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>> we want to *rate* examples, we just want to indicate
their
>>>>>>>>> degree of affiliation with jdf.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2012-07-10, at 10:25 AM, Jason Porter wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What about rendering the jdf "logo" as
a stamp? with some
>>>>>>>>>> specs on it or ink areas missing?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>>>> From: "Pete
Muir"<pmuir(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Jonathan
Fuerth"<jfuerth(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 7:53:37 AM
>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [jdf-dev] Looking for a (visual)
metaphor
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That could work.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'll see if I can do some mockups.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10 Jul 2012, at 14:50, Jonathan Fuerth
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A gold starburst "Official Supported
JBoss Demo" would
>>>>>>>>>>>> convey this
>>>>>>>>>>>> idea to me. Kind of like the Nintendo
Seal of Quality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As for the lesser-supported scenarios,
I'm not sure we
>>>>>>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>>>>>>> a mark
>>>>>>>>>>>> for that. The absence of the official
seal might be
>>>>>>>>>>>> enough.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Or, if the supported demos get an
Official Seal, maybe
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> in-the-works demos could get the
industrious
>>>>>>>>>>>> Soon-to-be-official
>>>>>>>>>>>> Beaver of Quality, and the unsupported
demos could get
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> completely unofficial Otter of Quality.
(ha, ha, ha.. OK,
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>> stop now.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -Jonathan
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>>>>> From: "Pete
Muir"<pmuir(a)redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To: jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 7:08:45 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [jdf-dev] Looking for a (visual)
metaphor
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We need a visual metaphor that quickly
conveys to people
>>>>>>>>>>>> that an
>>>>>>>>>>>> example is:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> * official, and something we will stand
by, answer
>>>>>>>>>>>> questions
>>>>>>>>>>>> on,
>>>>>>>>>>>> support in a product (e.g.
TicketMonster)
>>>>>>>>>>>> * something that we plan to add to as an
official example
>>>>>>>>>>>> later on
>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g. jbossworld keynote 2012)
>>>>>>>>>>>> * something that is really interesting,
but is unlikely
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>> official (e.g. Vineet's example)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We had thought about using ski run
colours (green circle,
>>>>>>>>>>>> blue
>>>>>>>>>>>> square, black diamond) to indicate the
level, but they
>>>>>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>>> refer more to difficulty than to
recommendation. Anyone
>>>>>>>>>>>> got
>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>> good ideas?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pete
>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jdf-dev mailing list
>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>
_______________________________________________
jdf-dev mailing list
jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
_______________________________________________
jdf-dev mailing list
jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org