Some time ago a question about the Sage logo was asked and answered on
Ask-Sage.
http://ask.sagemath.org/question/7667/geometric-name-of-sage-logo-existence-of-dual/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group
I think a logo refresh would be great. Companies refresh their logos all
the time without loss of continuity or brand recognition. I agree with the
concern that this kind of thing requires the skills of a professional
designer, but I don't see why such a professional couldn't be involved at
the
Interestingly, I just noticed that on the sagetrac webpage, the logo is
different than the usual one:
http://trac.sagemath.org/
It seems that this is actually the "real" picture behind Sagemath logo.
Could that be?
This would be that the logo is actually some sort of Schlegel diagram of a
hig
Dear Harald,
Thank you very much the detailed answer! This is pretty much what I was
looking for!
Indeed, it seems like a big decision to change the logo "just like that".
It is good to know
about the whole story behind the logo.
Of course, the point that logos develop a certain signature for
On Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 5:23:53 PM UTC+2, jplab wrote:
>
> What do you think?
>
Hi, sorry to spoil the party. I'm strongly against changing the logo in
such a substantial way. I'm happy with slight adoptions or creating
"doodles" (temporary modifications with a specific theme) but not a
I am pretty sure the current Sage logo is not an icosahedron - Harald can
explain the exact provenance, I am sure. Count the edges and vertices etc.
There are faces with four sides, for instance.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
On Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 11:07:10 AM UTC-5, Volker Braun wrote:
> What IMHO is lacking is that it is too complicated. A *logo* is ideally
> recognizable at 16x16px (e.g. favicon) and that pretty much excludes an
> icosahedron. Its just too busy for that purpose. Maybe a tetrahedron would
>
Looks nice, and it would be great to use as graphics on the sagemath web
page.
What IMHO is lacking is that it is too complicated. A *logo* is ideally
recognizable at 16x16px (e.g. favicon) and that pretty much excludes an
icosahedron. Its just too busy for that purpose. Maybe a tetrahedron wou
