I need a Textile logo

NicolasGraph · 2015-10-23 06:52:59

Destry wrote #296116:

As I was unable to find a much larger size of the php Textile logo above (needed if I was going to use it), and not really liking it much either, I played around with a few ideas of my own and came up with one I’m not too embarrassed to share publicly.

I like it! It’s definitely more 2015…
You could also try t(). with parenthesis used for classes, it would even more justify the dot which is used with each styled element (lists don’t have a dot when there is no class), but it is just a thought because I also like the simple t..

Last edited by NicolasGraph (2015-10-23 06:53:42)

philwareham · 2015-10-23 07:45:04

@destry.

Like it!

However, you might want to converse with netcarver, as he is the custodian of Textile (although he hasn’t worked on it in a while, to be honest).

candyman · 2015-10-23 08:30:39

Very nice. Simple and effective.

Destry · 2015-10-23 09:58:08

Thanks for the votes of confidence, and especially coming from our esteemed designer.

I’m fully aware of Netcarver’s involvement (and I will get in touch with him about that logo’s source), and he has my utmost respect for his development contributions to Textile. I’m pretty sure he’s not a designer, though, and may not even be the creator of that logo…

ax wrote #295950:

No, it is the official Textile logo

I’m not convinced that logo can be called “official” anymore than this one by Dustin Curtis can be for Markdown, for the simple fact neither language has an official standard, despite Atwood’s attempts to railroad one through for Markdown (which did not get the blessing of Gruber).

But unlike the Markdown logo created by Curtis, which clearly shows actual thought behind it, the Textile logo seems to have no recorded source at all; it’s as far away from being official as anything can be.

A few other things I’m able to observe:

Textile was born from Dean Allen for use with Textpattern. Dean never created a logo, but I’m sure he could have (considering his book/typography design background) and would not have approved of a capital “T” made out of three apostrophes, which doesn’t symbolize Textile in any way.

The Wikipedia page shows this version history of what is clearly the PHP version only, and they’re all tied to this community:

2004: v2.0 beta (Dean)
2006: v2.0 stable (zem)
2010: v2.2 (Netcarver, Bloke, et al — even included a feature I requested)
2012: v2.4 (Gocom)

A more updated release history is shown on the TxStyle site, indicating the latest version as 3.5.5.

The only other two Textile formats I can find is RedCloth (a Ruby version seemingly created in 2008) and one for Python (seemingly created in 2009). I’m not positive about those dates, and jgarber and sebix seem to be handlers of them, respectively.

The Textile Organization (GitHub’s term) lists the PHP version (Gocom/Netcarver), Python’s (sebix), and while RedCloth is not listed there, Garber is a contributor and appears to be the handler of a Textile Spec created in 2011, which has two issues, one of which is directed at Garber asking about textileit.com (offline and pointing to HoDaddy), which was presumably supposed to be the spec site. Based on that alone, I’d say the logo was meant to be more than just for PHP, but for Textile entirely, as a standard or spec that hasn’t actually been invented yet.

All things considered — and it’s just a guess, so I would happily stand corrected if anyone actually knows — but Garber probably created the 3-apostrophe logo one dark and gloomy night (sans care for the logo craft or manifest symbolism) with the idea of using it in relation with the spec website (which never materialized). He also probably added it on the Textile “organization” page (without any real objective from non-designers) with that spec intention in mind, and it’s just been sitting there in no official capacity ever since — an overlooked default. If it wasn’t Garber, then it was somebody else under a similar scenario, I’m sure.

So in preparation for my Medium article I’m going to pull a Dustin Curtis and create a Textile-mark repo on GitHub that will serve as a recorded source for a new logo mark, even if the logo mark is not “official”.

My version of the mark will be the one I showed previously, but I’ll probably work on that a little bit. As for the mark itself, I like just the “t.” — it’s 1) simpler, 2) reflective of the lettered parts of the syntax pattern, and 3) more to the nature of “just write” and “getting out of the way of the writer”. I think adding the parenthesis to symbolize selectors, for example, starts getting too geeky, IMO. (No offense, Nicolas.)

I would love to have more clarification on the history and details of things, however. That would be useful regardless of which direction is taken.

Last edited by Destry (2015-11-17 18:08:59)

GugUser · 2015-10-23 12:44:42

I like the logo. But, more space on the right side would better symbolize Textile (and break the symmetry).

hcgtv · 2015-10-23 13:10:33

The logo reminds me of tapatalk:

Destry · 2015-10-23 18:01:26

Trying GugUser’s idea of offsetting a bit…

NicolasGraph · 2015-10-23 18:17:53

hcgtv wrote #296130:

The logo reminds me of tapatalk:

Because it’s a t??

Destry wrote #296152:

Trying GugUser’s idea of offsetting a bit…

Nice! I’m not a huge fan of the border but it is maybe useful to have a version with it…

Destry · 2015-10-23 18:26:48

A double-struck “t” for the sake of curiosity.

Btw, does anyone know the process for creating a unicode symbol? I notice they did that for the Markdown mark, which looks like [M↓], but I’m also asking because of a different project.

Destry · 2015-10-23 18:32:50

NicolasGraph wrote #296154:

I’m not a huge fan of the border but it is maybe useful to have a version with it…

I’m not a fan of it either, but agreed it might be useful to show the relative dimension/scale. So without the border it’s (x + x/2) top, left, and bottom and (3x + x/2) right.

GugUser · 2015-10-23 19:13:36

I prefer this version without border.

With Fontello you can create a font from a SVC icon.

jakob · 2015-10-23 19:20:42

I like the basic idea too!

I’d never heard of tapatalk, so that didn’t strike a chord, but if anything it’s precariously close to the tumblr logo. They use a (chunkier) serif lowercase t and a wordmark with a dot at the end, and are in a similar business area. Quite by chance I saw that there’s an example of how not to use the tumblr logo at the bottom left of their logo page: www.tumblr.com/logo that looks very similar to your first idea. At a larger size it’s not a problem: the typefaces are different enough. At a smaller size, e.g. that of an icon, the finer differences are less discernible.

What could make it clearer both from a differentiation point of view and identity point of view is making GugUser’s idea a little more pronounced (the Germans say konsequenter = more deliberate), e.g. making the box wider, more rectangular (notionally like an input box or a textarea) and ranging the t. left as if it is about to start a sentence… That make it more readily distinguishable (albeit smaller) from other common variants…

EDIT: I agree, the flat version is definitely better

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#13 2015-10-23 06:52:59

Re: I need a Textile logo

Destry wrote #296116:

#14 2015-10-23 07:45:04

Re: I need a Textile logo

#15 2015-10-23 08:30:39

Re: I need a Textile logo

#16 2015-10-23 09:58:08

Re: I need a Textile logo

ax wrote #295950:

#17 2015-10-23 12:44:42

Re: I need a Textile logo

#18 2015-10-23 13:10:33

Re: I need a Textile logo

#19 2015-10-23 18:01:26

Re: I need a Textile logo

#20 2015-10-23 18:17:53

Re: I need a Textile logo

hcgtv wrote #296130:

Destry wrote #296152:

#21 2015-10-23 18:26:48

Re: I need a Textile logo

#22 2015-10-23 18:32:50

Re: I need a Textile logo

NicolasGraph wrote #296154:

#23 2015-10-23 19:13:36

Re: I need a Textile logo

#24 2015-10-23 19:20:42

Re: I need a Textile logo

Board footer