another logo possibility

[Alasdair Allan]

Andrew Drake wrote:
> Alasdair Allan wrote:
>> The other approach is to do the precisely the opposite, for  
>> instance look at Red Hat... it just has to work as a logo and  
>> allow brand recognition.
>
> Redhat has a red hat logo. You can't get much clearer than that.

I think you're missing the point, why is Red Hat called Red Hat?  
They're a Linux company, what does red hats have to do with Linux?  
Nothing, its just a random name they pulled out of a hat (no pun  
intended). It's a brand, nothing more. A logo (and a brand) doesn't  
have to have any relation to the product.

>> I rather like the latest logos (attached) that Rob made. What's  
>> wrong with having a few < /> angle brackets? its a logo, the  
>> people it means something to will get a chuckle, the people that  
>> it doesn't won't care.
>
> By using it we are emphasing the XML, which is just one way of  
> representing
> something which (hopefully) is intrinsically more interesting than  
> the semantics. Will we even want to stick with XML in a few years?

What do you see replacing it? I see VOEvent as intrinsically tied up  
with XML yes, I don't think you can take the XML out of a VOEvent and  
be left with much of anything left sticking with...?

The semantic content is interesting, but VOEvent is just a way of  
representing that semantic content XML. There isn't much more to the  
standard than a specification of how to arrange the angle brackets, I  
don't get your point here?

Al.