D brand identity repository

[David Gileadi]

On 7/4/11 4:50 AM, James Fisher wrote:
> A second draft: http://eegg.github.com/d-brand/mockup2.png
>
> Changes:
>
> Swapped out logo for more conservative change.
> Reduction in size of the tabs.
> Search bar.
> Quick-download thing.  Would have to use OS/arch detection to be effective.
> Moved code down into page.  Could expand.
>
> And important point that's not evident is that I'm designing for
> variable-width.  That image is for 1600px width, but that could shrink.
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 8:42 AM, James Fisher <jameshfisher at gmail.com
> <mailto:jameshfisher at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Jonathan M Davis
>     <jmdavisProg at gmx.com <mailto:jmdavisProg at gmx.com>> wrote:
>
>         Overall, I'd say that I have to agree. I like the current look
>         and feel of d-
>         programming-language.org <http://programming-language.org>, and
>         I don't see anything wrong with its logo either
>         (and it looks _way_ better than any of the logos suggested here
>         IMHO). I'm
>         sure that the site could be improved, but the kind of stuff
>         being discussed in
>         this thread is incredibly subjective and it doesn't generally
>         seem like much
>         of an improvement. d-programming-language.org
>         <http://d-programming-language.org> is generally a step up from how
>         www.digitalmars.com <http://www.digitalmars.com> looks, and the
>         website situation has been improving. So
>         truth be told, I don't understand this discussion at all. It
>         seems to me like
>         it's a bikeshedding argument on website and logo design. I'm
>         sure that help on
>         d-programming-language.org <http://d-programming-language.org>
>         would be appreciated, but working on redesigning
>         the website _again_ seems to me like a waste of time which would
>         be better
>         spent elsewhere.
>
>
>     I'm not sure what gave the impression that the people in this thread
>     want to start again from scratch, but that impression seems to be
>     the source of some hostility.  At least in my case, that's *not*
>     what I'm proposing.  Pretty much everything here can be categorized
>     as formalizing, cleaning up, or improving work that's already been done.

I think the fact that the mockups look quite different from the current 
site is generating the heat--something that looks radically different is 
different in peoples' minds, even if it's just a new skin.

I like your mockups, the 2nd one better than the first.  As with some 
other folks, I'm in favor of keeping the existing logo, which I think 
would look good with your design--better than it does on the existing 
site, in my opinion.  I also like that you're designing for variable widths.

One concern I have is that the D site has a lot of pages, and the 
navigation can be a bit hairy.  I'd like to see a mockup of a sub-page, 
a Phobos or Language Spec page for instance, that shows what 
sub-navigation would look like with your design.