text based vs. graphical logos (was: Re: Logos - something entirely new)

Georg Jakob jack at unix.sbg.ac.at
Wed Mar 28 14:27:16 UTC 2001

Hi again,

On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Anja Gerwinski kindly wrote:

> Georg C. F. Greve wrote on Mar 23, 2001 at 02:04PM +0100:
> > It does show one thing, though. We apparently have a confusion on this
> > list about what a logo is. A logo is normally text-based and
> > non-graphical. The only logo I can think of right now that is
> > graphical is the one of Apple. 
> I don't agree with you. I cannot think of any company / organisation
> logo that has text _only_. They all have at least shape and color.

Well, some seven or eight years ago I've been involved with graphics and
if I remember it right, a letter-only identifier for a organisation or
company is called "signet", whereas a logo is *usually* a symbol, but
*can* combine that with letters or text.
But I might be wrong on that. Anyone got an exact definition? ;-) 

> [...]  But for
> the FSFE logo I would rather look at company and organisation logos,
> not product logos.

The UNESCO has a (great) Logo combining text and graphics:
UNICEF, too:
Ammnesty International has a Graphic based Logo (barb wire around candle)
Greenpeace has more of a signet, not a logo, but the 12 monkeys had a
great logo ;-)




More information about the Discussion mailing list