Re-branding: new name, new logo?

[shankari]

As e-mission transitions to an NREL project, we are considering re-branding it.

Rebranding will:

• make the trademark acquisition process simpler
• allow the logo to be consistent with other projects both in the current group and in the lab
• potentially allow the new trademark to help drive standardization
  • this could be similar to the SEED project (https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/open-source-strategy, "What is the difference between modifying the SEED base code and creating add-ons? How do modifications or add-ons affect the use of the SEED trademark brand?")

Any thoughts on the re-branding, particularly as it may interact with #548?

[PatGendre]

@shankari certainly re-branding e-mission would have several benefits, as the current name seems too much linked with CO2, but is not an easy task. Most software names are most often not related with what the software does after all. As for choosing a new name, I guess you would have to choose it quite soon if you want to update the github repo in the coming weeks.
If it is an acronym, it should contain names such as open, personal, mobility, standard, data, framework / toolbox, smartphone When we started the fabmob project last year, I had this name Opossum, which could stand for Operational Open Source toolbox for Smartphone-based Usage of personal Mobility data collection, because it was easy then to make a logo ;-)
The most important is that the new brand is quickly adopted and in line with your objectives at NREL.
It would be great if this included standardising the output diary trips, as discussed with the zephyr transport group or mobility data.