[POLL] Do we need a logo?
flagxor opened this issue · 27 comments
Perhaps we should have a cool logo?
But what...
Inspired by the JavaScript logo (since this is a JS module):
(That's just a quick PNG I made, I will provide a proper SVG if this is what people vote for 😃)
LOL :-)
Yes or no for logo: Yes!
Yes or no for that one... maybe :-)
That logo makes me think it's part of the Adobe Creative Suite...
I like the old NASA logo. Maybe something like this?
Made with this
I know I'm only criticizing and haven't proposed a logo yet, but that does seem a bit too long for a logo, doesn't it?
@FellippeHeitor Maybe then we could use this and use the above one as a banner?
These are just rough drafts That's the google material design logo for "computer" so if we use the svg version of it it'll be real crisp-looking
Keeping it rough.
|
-|-
I like it!
@anilkilic that looks great!
Yeah like that a lot.
I wasn't expecting such a great response, thanks a lot. I tried to explore some use cases with some context in the meantime. I'm not sure just to able to visualise how it can be used, in presentations and such.
Here's a mockup I did in MS Paint because I can't afford Photoshop and can't legally admit to getting it anyway:
I really like the idea of a homage to IBM's designs, especially the blue-on-white logo.
Hadn't thought of it till just now (due to all the fine logo work!), but I suppose styling on the title is a little odd.
As BASIC is an acronym, WWWBasic seems odd.
I suppose we could style it as one of:
- WWWBASIC
- wwwBASIC
- WWW-BASIC
Offhand, wwwBASIC seems most readable.
What do folks think?
Definitely agree with wwwBASIC, maybe WWW.BASIC or www.BASIC would be better though.
my vote is for stylizing it as wwwBASIC
wwwBASIC is good, emphasizes the BASIC part.
W3BASIC would have been cool too... W3 for WWW, leet-wise it also spells WEB using the B from BASIC... just digressing.
Might seem a little off-topic, but actually I think this shouldn't even include www in the name as it's not exclusively usable "on the web" but is a JS library.
Sure, most people still think of JavaScript as a web thing and might even include BASIC on their websites, but I doubt that this prefix really makes sense. 🤔
I like it but it doesn't really, uh, describe what the thing is. /s
WBasic *as in QBasic, and w=web
jsBasic
basicJS
..
i'd vote anything with pixel art styled logo too
After a while to think I still really like @unitycoder 's idea and @metaa 's idea also looks really good to me. Any new thoughts? I feel like the conversation may have stagnated.
Really heavily feel that we should make clear this BASIC is for any JS app, not just the web, as mentioned by @metaa again. Maybe a new issue should be opened to address that?
Hi All,
Sorry to go dark for a bit, busy times.
Names are hard :-)
I primarily went with wwwbasic as it was an "empty vessel" and passed a name clash search with other projects.
For example:
WBasic:
- http://www.computercraft.info/forums2/index.php?/topic/21471-beta-wbasic-a-basic-interpreter-for-cc/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:W-basic
jsBasic:
- http://jsbasic.apphb.com/
- https://github.com/danielflower/JSBasic
- https://github.com/inexorabletash/jsbasic
- https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/25069/JSBasic-A-BASIC-to-JavaScript-Compiler
basicjs:
- https://www.npmjs.com/package/basic-js
- https://gist.github.com/jacopocolo/5d949e59f4f8fb930c5a4771b2e08d76
Agreed the the web-centric emphasis is inexact, but on the other hand so are WebAssembly and Webpack. It at least highlights one goal.
It could be worse. The runner up was porkbasic :-)
There seemed to be no controversy that wwwBASIC at least improved on WWWBasic, and it reduces the web emphasis, so I just pushed that change.
If we want to deemphasize the www, perhaps the anilkilic's proposal at least makes it largely a visual wiggle. It also has a bit of pixel like flavor to it (albeit diagonal).
Straight pixel art has its appeal too.
The cat is well.. Hi Derek ;-)
I wonder if we could produce something that can be done largely through CSS. @anilkilic what sort of tools did you use to use to produce your proposal?
Just a quick idea if we accomplish it through css: https://css-tricks.com/the-css-paint-api/
Also, I've discovered figured out by using multiple css background gradients with pixel-wide transition areas and rotation you can make complex patterns out of just css3.
@anilkilic' idea with only HTML and CSS 😄