Skip to main content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Post

New small link buttons

40 replies [Last post]
ariadacapo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-13

I am rather ill these days so I concentrated on doing simple easy things. Here is a set of small (80 x 15 px) link buttons.
I made all possible combination of text and graphics, which (I hope) should satisfy everyone, whichever mascot/taxonomy they use.
A few excerpts:





--> entire set

I'll try to make them readily available on GGL soon. Proposing a rotating button (changing every page refresh, not blinking) could be nice, too.

If anyone wants to have a go, the source files are available (Gimp xcf).

Oh, and I couldn't resist poking fun at our "partners": quack_quack.png :-) (this is not going to be used).

Mabe soon I'll tackle larger sizes. As usual, contributions, suggestions, comments all welcome.

Gustavo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-11
Hi!I like them, but I have

Hi!

I like them, but I have some suggestions/comments:

  • Instead of icons with "GNU/Linux", "GNU / Linux" and "GNU|Linux", we should pick up only one of them because they're basically the same icon... And I like the last one because it looks more original, imo.
  • I don't like the GNU head icon so small because I almost cannot distinguish its face. I like the way it looks as the GGL's icon because it's basically the shape, but for link buttons, its face should be clear.

Cheers!

Bjwebb's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-01
Those look good. I posted

Those look good. I posted about getGNU/Linux on the ubuntu-uk mailing list, got a generally positive response, and one of the few things that was brought up was the lack penguins, it looks like this has been rectified Smiling

One think I wonder is whether there is any way to track who is linking to us.

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
Nice, these seem to be

Nice, these seem to be better than one I'm using on Libervis.. gonna pick one and change. Smiling

bjwebb wrote:

One think I wonder is whether there is any way to track who is linking to us.

The only reliable way I can think of would be to put some tracking code into the code we'd be offering to people to link to us with. That code would have to send in the URL of the site that links to us.. But that might scare potential linkers.. and still some people would just use a clean link anyway.

I guess best way to see where the traffic is coming from is still referrer stats.

free-zombie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-08
the last one looks

the last one looks decapitated after staring at it long enough to understand it.

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
lol yeah now that you

lol yeah now that you mention it.. Laughing out loud

Bjwebb's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-01
How long before these go on

How long before these go on http://planet.getgnulinux.org/help ?

Also, I think we need a link on the main page of GGL linking to that page. A link to us button or something.

Gustavo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-11
libervisco wrote: I guess
libervisco wrote:

I guess best way to see where the traffic is coming from is still referrer stats.

+1.

ariadacapo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-13
I can't take care of this

I can't take care of this right now but if anyone wants to develop this button thing further, contact me for access for a planet / ftp account etc.
apologies
O

ariadacapo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-13
Alright there are two new

Alright there are two new buttons, an extra attempt because the "classic" GNU head scales very poorly on small sizes: and (see set at bottom).

Now here are the things we need to sort out before releasing the buttons on the planet:

  1. We need to keep only one or two out of the current ways to write "GNU/Linux": , , . I understand Gustavo likes #2.
  2. Is it possible to make a smaller page? Including the long code text next to each button makes things hard to read and now we are going to have 10x more buttons.
    I thought maybe a script could do it: you enter the number of the button in a box and it outputs the full valid XHTML code for the given link button.
  3. I'd like to release the source files for the buttons under a CC-by license, does this sound like a good idea?

When the buttons are up, I like your idea of including a "link to us" link instead of the current link button in the footer of GGL, Bjwebb...
As for decapitated penguins and other horrors, I'd personally leave it to individual webmasters to decide ;-)

Gustavo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-11
ariadacapo wrote: We need
ariadacapo wrote:

We need to keep only one or two out of the current ways to write "GNU/Linux": , , . I understand Gustavo likes #2.

Yes =)

ariadacapo wrote:

Is it possible to make a smaller page? Including the long code text next to each button makes things hard to read and now we are going to have 10x more buttons.
I thought maybe a script could do it: you enter the number of the button in a box and it outputs the full valid XHTML code for the given link button.

Yes, I think something like this (that one can toggle/expand), would come in handy.

ariadacapo wrote:

I'd like to release the source files for the buttons under a CC-by license, does this sound like a good idea?

I think so.

Cheers!

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
I like the #2 way of

I like the #2 way of writing too, but I'm fine with #1 as well.

Also, CC-BY is a good license. Smiling

ariadacapo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-13
draft

I did most of the work (clean-up, code writing) on the way to publishing the buttons: here's a draft.

The problems are:
1. The Javascript script only takes effect after the page has fully loaded (which takes ages with this many buttons).
2. I can't make the JS work with wordpress (planet site), yet.

The license will be CC-BY - I was only worried about re-licensing works that are licensed differently or entirely protected. A small note with the source files will now say:

license.txt wrote:

These link buttons and the source files for them are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.
This means you are free to use, modify, distribute them for any purpose, providing you give the GNU/Linux Matters association appropriate credit.
Read the full license at:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

This license does NOT wave rights on the original graphics, which are licensed under various terms, including public domain, GNU-FDL and full copyright. Only the use of the very low resolution files (~20px) is covered by Fair Use.

free-zombie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-08
Why textareas ?

Why textareas ?

Gustavo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-11
If the license of the

If the license of the original images are cc-by incompatible, I'm afraid it's probably not legal to make derivative work and/or redistribute them, even if you acknowledge that fact.

My suggestion is either find out whether their licenses are cc-by compatible, or ask their authors for permission, if they are not.

Cheers!

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
Very nice. About licenses,

Very nice.

About licenses, most of these materials should be freely licensed (and probably compatible), but I agree with Gustavo for those you're not sure off. I don't think anyone would mind anyway and it's probably all under fair use.

ariadacapo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-13
These were exactly my

These were exactly my doubts about the CC licensing. I did some research to find the authors & licenses, and re-wrote the license:

license.txt wrote:

These buttons are built with source images licensed under various terms:
Baby Tux, and Colored penguin (including head): public domain (Open Clipart Project)
Penguin foot: public domain (author: GNU/Linux Matters)
Black and White GNUs: Free Art License, A. Heckert and Sven H., as distributed by the FSF
Colored GNU: David Vignoni, GNU FDL license
Baby GNU: by FSF, GPL license.

These link button XCF files are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license by the GNU/Linux Matters association. Read the full CC-BY license at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

While the use of very low resolution (~20px) graphics certainly qualifies as fair use, this CC-BY license does NOT waive any right on the original full-size graphics, and does not include the graphics that are not in the public domain.

I now believe it's best to not put a license on the actual buttons (just the source files).

free-zombie wrote:

Why textareas ?

simply because it's much quicker than typing each special character as an HTML symbol. It doesn't validate, but since it's not on the main site, it's not a priority for me right now.

As soon as I solve or reduce the above problems, these buttons will go online.

Gustavo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-11
I think you should do so
ariadacapo wrote:

I now believe it's best to not put a license on the actual buttons (just the source files).

I think you should do so. It would be unclear for people what they're allowed to do with your work.

If you don't want to spend time finding out which license is compatible, just write something like: "You are allowed to use and redistribute these images in non-profit activities".

Bjwebb's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-01
Just so you know, the CC-BY

Just so you know, the CC-BY is incompatible with several other licenses, including some of those the icoins are under. Therefore, I would suggest you use a statement like:

Quote:

These link button XCF files may be freely used, provided that proper attribution is given to GNU/Linux Matters if you distrbute these files or any deriative works.

This would be compatible with all the copyleft licenses (I think) so each of the respective buttons could but used under the respective copyleft license. And as for the public domain ones, this condition can naturally be added.

a thing's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-12-20
license incompatibility
FAL wrote:

All the elements of this work of art must remain free, which is why you are not allowed to integrate the originals (originals and subsequents) into another work which would not be subject to this license.

GFDL wrote:

You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.

GGPL wrote:

You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.

So for the PD ones, you should use the license Bjwebb posted, but for the others, you have to use their original license.

Bjwebb's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-01
The xcf files for all of them could be under my license
a thing wrote:

So for the PD ones, you should use the license Bjwebb posted, but for the others, you have to use their original license.

No, but the xcf files are original work, so they can be under my license, then the actual buttons containing copylefted images would be under that copyleft license.

free-zombie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-08
the XCF images include the

the XCF images include the bleeding copylefted work.

Bjwebb's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-01
But surely the XCF files

But surely the XCF files are simply source files or do they actually include the image.

If they do the XCF file does actually contain the copylefted image, then of course, they would have to be under the relevant copylefted license.

free-zombie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-08
I am not aware of the

I am not aware of the details of the XCF format, but I am sure that if you copy the file as such to a machine without source images you'll still have the same result -> the images must be included.

ariadacapo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-13
Yes and no - the "source

Yes and no - the "source files" are included, but only at their final resolution - with widths of around 20px, we're quite far from file sizes usable anywhere else:

I will simply improve on the text above by adding links to original files and to full license texts. As for the final buttons (PNG files, not XCF), is now looks best to not put any restriction/license on them, which seems acceptable with very low resolutions.

I can't manage to solve the 2 problems above so any help would be welcome.
Olivier.

free-zombie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-08
I hope I do not understand

I hope I do not understand correctly that you are considering to avoid complying with a copyleft license ? I am pretty sure no one would care, but that's beside the point. If there is a copylefted source file, no matter how little information is taken from it, the author's rights should be respected. Think about what GGL is about.

XCF, PNG - image is image, copyleft is copyleft.

guyjohnston's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-03-05
I don't like 'GNU|Linux'

I like those new buttons. I think they look a lot better than the black and white gnu head ones. Personally, I don't like the second way of writing 'GNU/Linux', 'GNU|Linux'. I think it makes it look more like the button is promoting the two separate things, GNU and Linux, rather than the single operating system made from combining them. I think it might also cause a small amount of confusion for some people as it's normally written 'GNU/Linux'. My favourite way of writing it is the first one, so as some people seem to like the second one, I think both of them should be used.

a thing's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-12-20
need one
ariadacapo wrote:

best to not put any restriction/license on them

(In many places) if you don't put on any restriction/license, then no one but you has any legal right to use it for any purpose.

ariadacapo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-13
free_zombie wrote: If
free_zombie wrote:

If there is a copylefted source file, no matter how little information is taken from it, the author's rights should be respected. Think about what GGL is about.

While I would fully agree had the files been of recognizable size, I don't think author's rights are being disrespected here. The very small size makes the graphic look much closer to a generic gnu drawing than anything else. Drawing a gnu doesn't entitle someone to all rights on the idea of the drawing of a gnu, or 50 pixels arranged in a shape that resemble a piece of their drawing.
In a similar line of thinking, after some consideration, I don't believe I hold any kind of right on the idea of a button with "GNU/Linux" written on it (especially when such a button was derived from a Firefox button in the first place). I'm sure tempted to release the button under a copyleft license or even public domain, but who am I to decide this?

I don't believe me or GLM is allowed to "get away" with a license; I just believe in some cases copyright/copyleft/author rights do not apply. It seems fair use to me that to copy and let anyone copy these very small pieces of information. Providing link to the original artwork (and making clear we are not waiving any right on them) is enough in this case, I believe.

In short, I view the process as quoting - the copylefted graphics used here are like a word or phrase. Encumbering the re-use of this "phrase" by adjoining a notice and full copyleft license to every copy (on every website using a button?) seems to go against the original purpose of copyleft.

I am not taking the matter lightly - please tell me exactly what you think should be done. I am not releasing anything until we settle on something.

a thing's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-12-20
irrelevant

It doesn't matter what you believe. It's still using copyrighted material.

Relying on fair use isn't a very good thing, and is silly when the copyrighted material is copylefted anyway.

free-zombie's picture
Offline