Settle on the text

[waldoj]

We need to figure out what the text should say. Obvious candidates are "Powered By Open Data" and "Open Data Inside," since those build on existing brand frameworks.

[matthewgee]

I think "Powered By Open Data" works better than "Open Data Inside". I'm guessing most uses of the badge won't be as stickers on a physical product.

Other candidates, in decreasing order of quality:

• "Made with Open Data"
• "Runs on Open Data"
• "Built on Open Data"
• "Open Data is the Best! Don't You Agree?"

I think Powered By is still the best candidate. Let's use it unless something much better comes along in the next week.

[danxoneil]

The problem with "Powered by Open Data" is that it's impossible to deliver on that promise. Nothing is ever completely "powered" by open data-- it merely contains it.

That's why I like "Open data inside" (w/o initial caps).

[waldoj]

@matthewgee, I think it's OK for "inside" to be metaphorical, especially in a medium that still uses "home" to describe a site's front page. :) Though, to be fair, that applies to "powered by," too, IMHO.

We're almost certainly going to have to keep this to ~4 words or less, and two of those are going to be "open data." So that limits our options a great deal, for better or for worse.

[matthewgee]

Okay, I'm persuaded. Open data inside it is.

[JoshData]

Fyi, same initials as ODI.

[waldoj]

Huh. Total coincidence, but yeah. We'll want to make sure that nothing about the design emphasizes those initials, because we definitely want this to be all about open data, and not at all about the US ODI.

[sglassmeyer]

I like "made" instead of "powered" ...seems less techie and more democratic? Reminds me of this, too: http://www.louisvillemade.com/

[waldoj]

@copiesofcopies points out on Twitter that it's possible that "X Inside" would make Intel's lawyers twitchy. It seems like such a vague string of text that it's unlikely, but I think we'd want to explore that question before proceeding with such a construct.

[JoshData]

Didn't I mention that like a month ago? :)

[waldoj]

Didn't I mention that like a month ago?

Maybe, but did you mention it in a venue with a unique URL that I could link to and credit you? :)

[JoshData]

Fair point!

[brianjgeiger]

We use "Open Data" https://osf.io/hr67w/

[waldoj]

With the appropriate graphical element, it's possible that simply "open data" would work for this use case, too! The distinction that needs to be made, though, is between "we publish open data" and "we're using open data." This project is to promote the latter concept, rather than the former. Again, though, perhaps that's achievable graphically.

[brianjgeiger]

Yes, in our case it is explicitly stating that this project provides data that is open, not that it uses open data.

[waldoj]

And I think that comes across really quite clearly—it's a good example of doing more with less.

[copiesofcopies]

How's about "Open Data Committed," which entendres double: "we're committed to open data" and "open data is committed here." Too cute?

[waldoj]

entendres double

Let's all pause to consider what @copiesofcopies did here.

[waldoj]

Over time I've come to worry about "open data inside," not because I think Intel is liable to fuss (there's certainly not a substantial likelihood of confusion, as is the legal test), but because I worry that they might. Now, I can handle being fussed at by Intel's lawyers, but the goal here is to get other people using this graphic, and I'd hate to be handing out poison pills. I do like it, but I don't feel right about potentially setting people up for a cease & desist order. :-/

[brianjgeiger]

Other options:

Uses Open Data
Provides Open Data

These are fairly similar to what @matthewgee proposed months ago.

OpenData.get()
OpenData.put()

The downsides of the get and put are 1) may feel exclusionary for some languages; 2) exclusionary towards non-programmers in general; 3) Does .get() mean it has data or it provides data?

On Jun 12, 2014, at 10:45 AM, Waldo Jaquith [email protected] wrote:

Over time I've come to worry about "open data inside," not because I think Intel is liable to fuss (there's certainly not a substantial likelihood of confusion, as is the legal test), but because I worry that they might. Now, I can handle being fussed at by Intel's lawyers, but the goal here is to get other people using this graphic, and I'd hate to be handing out poison pills. I do like it, but I don't feel right about potentially setting people up for a cease & desist order. :-/

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[waldoj]

I like "open data committed," but I think it actually signs people up for more than we're looking to do with this. This is meant for folks who just want to advertise that they're using open data, not that they're making a lifestyle choice. :)

The aforementioned "made with open data," "built on open data," and "uses open data"—while unglamorous textually in their present form—certainly convey the right concept. Perhaps we should select one of these (or maybe just be happy with narrowing it down to a few options), and then pass them along to a designer to see what s/he can do to render them cleverly, either linguistically or visually (or both).

(For those following along at home, @usodi will be contracting with a designer to turn these ideas into reality.)

[waldoj]

@matthewgee, 24 hours later, I think I'd like to transition to a design phase. That means passing along this discussion and our conclusions (such as they are) to somebody in the branding/design space to render some rough concepts, which we could open up to a new discussion. (I'd advertise an RFP for that and USODI will foot the bill.) Does that seem like a good next step to take now?