[OpenID] 2.0 logo? (was RE: OpenID Logo Retouched)

[Peter Williams]

Speaking as an outsider, the term to be associated with is openid (not openid 2). The average punter would not get the technical differences between openid1 and openid2 after even a one hour lecture by the standard's authors.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Hardt <dick at sxip.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:40 PM
To: Drummond Reed <drummond.reed at cordance.net>
Cc: david at sixapart.com <david at sixapart.com>; 'OpenID List' <general at openid.net>
Subject: Re: [OpenID] 2.0 logo? (was RE:  OpenID Logo Retouched)

+1 on a logo that indicates 2.0 capable

On 15-Jan-08, at 8:25 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:

> David,
>
> Last spring, the folks forming what is now the OpenID Foundation  
> reached
> rough consensus that it would be good to have a distinct logo for
> 2.0-enabled sites, as those sites can offer some features that 1.x  
> does not.
>
> We never acted on it because 2.0 took so long to go final. But now  
> it's
> 2008, and the waiting game is over ;-)
>
> Should we revisit the idea of having a 2.0-enabled version of the  
> logo?
>
> =Drummond
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general- 
>> bounces at openid.net] On
>> Behalf Of David Recordon
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 3:30 PM
>> To: Snorri
>> Cc: 'OpenID List'
>> Subject: Re: [OpenID] OpenID Logo Retouched
>>
>> I'm not sure if tying this to OpenID 2.0 is really even that
>> important, would be more concerned about creating confusion around if
>> something supports 1.1 or 2.0 based solely on the logo.  I think this
>> is looked at as a strong incremental improvement to the logo.
>>
>> --David
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>
>

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general at openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general