90
edits
Engagement/Brand and Identity Guide: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
added links
(added image) |
(added links) |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
[[file:Project_Branding_Overview-2.jpg|750px]] | [[file:Project_Branding_Overview-2.jpg|750px]] | ||
This is a system that is already in use throughout the organization. Quick examples you can see are on the Firefox side of things (Project Tofino), and on all of the newest Connected Devices experiments (Project Vaani, Project SensorWeb, Project Link, etc). | This is a system that is already in use throughout the organization. Quick examples you can see are on the Firefox side of things (Project Tofino), and on all of the newest [[Connected_Devices#Current_Projects|Connected Devices experiments]] (Project Vaani, Project SensorWeb, Project Link, etc). | ||
This process is meant to make it easy for you select a name and get going without a lot of approvals and unnecessary process in the way. If you think the new work you’re doing should not have this system applied to it, or if you think marketing needs to get involved for some other reason, | This process is meant to make it easy for you select a name and get going without a lot of approvals and unnecessary process in the way. If you think the new work you’re doing should not have this system applied to it, or if you think marketing needs to get involved for some other reason, [http://mailto:marketing-request@mozilla.com reach out to us] and we’ll do our best to help. | ||
The “re-assessment” of the name at the Initiatives stage is also meant to be low impact. Even at this stage as the technology should be very mature, it is not being released as a product. The review will probably check in on legal issues and whether the current name is harmful in any way. I.e. does it actively confuse developers or users? Does it make anything harder? As long as it’s not actually detrimental, there shouldn’t be a reason to change it. | The “re-assessment” of the name at the Initiatives stage is also meant to be low impact. Even at this stage as the technology should be very mature, it is not being released as a product. The review will probably check in on legal issues and whether the current name is harmful in any way. I.e. does it actively confuse developers or users? Does it make anything harder? As long as it’s not actually detrimental, there shouldn’t be a reason to change it. | ||