Just my 2 cents, since we had experienced similar discussion last year
in Wikimania 2007.
First of all, for the Chinese character, though it did look like the
word "ancestor" in Chinese but the shape is in fact a little bit
different.
The character on logo is 10 stroke (1) but the character for ancestor
is 9 stroke (2). The meaning of (1) is good or beautiful (it seems
also the name of a county in ancient China) while (2) is ancestor.
(1)
http://www.chinese-tools.com/jdd/public/char/9000/8534.gif
(2)
http://www.chinese-tools.com/jdd/public/char/9000/8043.gif
And (1) is rarely used today compares to (2), either from personal
experience or according to google (191,000 vs 61,600,000).
Though most of us thought it might be a beautiful mistake that the
original designer used the wrong character on logo, we could not
confirm that since it seems no one knows who was the designer. So we
stick on the original design.
What I want to say is that, just like Guillaume Paumier mentioned,
there'll be no official answer for this question. I also think there's
no such thing as the correct version, just like the articles on
wikipedia, the logo came from the community and should follow the same
spirit, which means it should be "editable" or "evolutionary".
On the other hand, consider the fact that most people are familiar
with the original logo, I think it has done pretty well for it's
purpose. A 3D version is good but it should do more than just
identification? then we might need to discuss about the primary reason
about why we need a 3D version?
For instance, the wiki-ball in Wikimania 2007 was served as souvenir,
it made us easier to design the "dark side" of the ball (the point was
entertaining :P). However, if we want to make an "official" 3D design
of the logo, perhaps we could do it the community way (the whole vote,
discuss or even committee things)? just an idea.
BTW, if I remember correctly, the logo was not exactly round but a
little but ellipse. :P
Best Regards,
Tzu-Chiang
--
Tzu-Chiang Liou
LinkedIn:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/tcliou
FaceBook:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=543610417
Email: tcliou@ {gmail.com|iis.sinica.edu.tw}
Quoting Simetrical <Simetrical+wikilist(a)gmail.com>om>:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:37 PM, geni
<geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
No. The letters on the globe roughly equate to
"w" or "wi"
The Hebrew letter is a resh ("R" sound), and the Greek one is a
capital omega with smooth breathing (in ancient Greek a long "O"
sound, today a long "I" sound). Doing a little research, the Cyrillic
is a "Y" sound. The Japanese is the modern katakana representation of
"wi". The Chinese character I have no idea how to look up, but
apparently it means "ancestor". I don't recognize the writing system
that the one below it represents. The rest are at an angle and I
can't even make out their shapes properly.
But anyway, the letters certainly don't all represent "w" sounds. The
Hebrew should be a vav or double-vav, if that were the case. The
closest equivalents in both Greek and Cyrillic (neither of which has a
"W" sound, I'm pretty sure) apparently both look exactly like a
capital B, admittedly, at least to judge by their Wikipedias' names,
so their current versions might be the most suitable if that were the
goal. But I don't think that the goal was specifically to make them
"W" sounds.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
