Change to non-textual OSMaxx logo (e.g. OSM map + scissors)

[das-g]

The current OSMaxx logos

• (can't find @sfkeller's single-line original, that was used on some poster)
• (used in OSMaxx website header)

• (used as favicon)

  communicates almost nothing about the project except for its name.

I've come up with a new, more visual (actually, entirely non-textual) logo concept, based on the current OpenStreetMap "magnifying glass" logo but with the magnifying glass itself removed and a scissor added: (SVG here)

As the OpenStreetMap "magnifying glass" logo is a registered trademark of the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF), I had this logo vetted by the Foundation's License Working Group (LWG). Due to removal of key elements (the magnifying glass), they don't see any risk of it being confused with their trademark, so we are allowed to use this or similar logos for OSMaxx.

So, should we change the logo to something like the suggested one? (Vote by leaving a :+1: or :-1: reaction or write a comment.)

(If so, we should probably first collect all the locations where the current logos are used and should be replaced.)

[sfkeller]

A logo is a wordmark and is not really meant to communicate something about the project - except the project name itself :-)

I'm not against a symbol as you suggest. Actually, I very much welcome such self-identification activities. But any logo or symbol needs to fulfill e.g. readability in around less than 100x100 least pixels. That's not yet the case in this symbol/logo.

In my optinion this issue has no urgency and I would wait some time with such a visual change e.g. until we have a new "big" release of OSMaxx.

[das-g]

A logo is a wordmark [...]

Is it? Even if so, I mean the symbol / icon / mark that we currently have (and that happens to be a visually styled wordmark), and think that it should be replace by an image-mark, whatever that should be called then.

(Of course this would mean that at some places where currently only the styled wordmark is used, we'd want to use the image mark + some (styled or unstyled) text if we actually replace the mark.)

[A]ny logo or symbol needs to fulfill e.g. readability in around less than 100x100 least pixels. That's not yet the case in this symbol/logo.

By "readability" do you mean that some actual text must be readable (which the suggested symbol/icon/logo cannot fulfill regardless of size due to containing none) or that it should be (re-)recognizable at that size?

Here's how it looks at 100×100 pixels:

It doesn't quite fare as well for typical favicon sizes (at least the smallest one, 16×16 px):

size	icon
16×16 px
32×32 px
48×48 px
64×64 px

[das-g]

In my optinion this issue has no urgency

Agreed.

and I would wait some time with such a visual change e.g. until we have a new "big" release of OSMaxx.

OK.