Open Bug 397632 (ArabicLogotype) Opened 12 years ago Updated Last year
Arabic Logotype for Firefox wordmark brand recognition in non-Roman/Latin scripts/writing systems
41.79 KB, image/png
42.38 KB, image/png
40.78 KB, image/png
14.78 KB, image/png
61.59 KB, image/png
658.56 KB, image/png
First, I've designed a logotype for Firefox, which is the transliteration in Arabic script (I'm going to attach here). Is it possible to get it (with any modification) as a (registered?) trademark and use it on the localized versions (of the product and/or website) for languages based on Arabic script? The font of the logotype is based on Terafik, with some modifications. The Arabic letters of Terafik font are free (i've designed some of them, and the base was public-domain) and are published by FarsiWeb project <farsiweb.info>. I will attach the one with original font too. Also, we can use a mirrored version of Firefox globe-and-fox logo beside such trademark. Of course it's not necessary, and maybe not good for marketing, but it would have more visual info, to show that the installed/running version of Firefox, is in a RTL l10n, and it's useful because many native LTR user, are almost unable to use applications in RTL. Some way, fox's hand in the logo shows a direction, and it would be interesting to mirror it for RTL users.
Of course the motto should not be used. (this is a sample, in Persian language)
What is the rationale for having a separate logo for RTL builds? Aren't logos supposed to represent a certain product? Wouldn't having two versions of the logo confuse the users? I can't remember seeing a different logo for RTL version of any app, that is why this puzzled me.
(In reply to comment #4) > What is the rationale for having a separate logo for RTL builds? Aren't logos > supposed to represent a certain product? Wouldn't having two versions of the > logo confuse the users? > See comment #1. > I can't remember seeing a different logo for RTL version of any app, that is > why this puzzled me. > Do you remember any old (dos, win95, etc) Persian word processor or calligraphy application with a pen, which its head was on the left side, and the tail on the right side. Also do you remember MS Word's icon, with a pen, with head in right, and tail in left? Probably you haven't see any Windows application which has the right application name in different languages. So you expect them to have different icons for different languages?
As for Hebrew, we do not agree with you. To me the mirrored logo look bad, and people here already familiar with the regular logo. As for the text, we stick with the Mozilla guidelines, and never translate the Firefox trademark in the official sites. For example here - http://www.firefox.co.il.
(In reply to comment #6) > As for Hebrew, we do not agree with you. To me the mirrored logo look bad, and > people here already familiar with the regular logo. I second that!
(In reply to comment #6) > As for Hebrew, we do not agree with you. To me the mirrored logo look bad, and > people here already familiar with the regular logo. It doesn't look so bad to me. IMHO it doesn't confuse users too. But you know, it doesn't worth it, as many users won't even notice the difference, and it would be just a little annoying. > As for the text, we stick with the Mozilla guidelines, and never translate the > Firefox trademark in the official sites. For example here - > http://www.firefox.co.il. About the logotype, this a request to use the transliteration for all Arabic-based languages; thus it's a request to change the guideline. Here in Iran, there is huge difference between trademarks with Persian logotype, vs. the ones without any Persian text/logotype. IMO this is necessary for Iranian localized version.
(In reply to comment #8) > It doesn't look so bad to me. IMHO it doesn't confuse users too. But you > know, it doesn't worth it, as many users won't even notice the difference, and > it would be just a little annoying. If this approved, you'll need to change every logo and image of Firefox to the mirrored version. Too much work in my opinion for something that will look the same for most of the users at your locale. In Hebrew we say "Don't fix something that is not broken". :-)
are there other cases where logos of other products are specialized for RTL? I'm thinking beyond the ones in commment 5, and things that might be more consumer oriented like shoe, soft drink, automobile logs, etc... If there isn't precedence for modifying logos like that I'd say let not go to the extra work of making the changes and any trying to keep them in sync with any modifications that we might make the Firefox logo over time.
(In reply to comment #11) > are there other cases where logos of other products are specialized for RTL? > I'm thinking beyond the ones in commment 5, and things that might be more > consumer oriented like shoe, soft drink, automobile logs, etc... If there > isn't precedence for modifying logos like that I'd say let not go to the extra > work of making the changes and any trying to keep them in sync with any > modifications that we might make the Firefox logo over time. Well, the short answer is no. If a brand has a non-typographic logo, it wouldn't change for RTL. But there has been more attention to make Perso-Arabic logotypes for foreign brands for a few years here. I think the situation is similar in other countries with Arabic script. (I used to collect photos of ads with bilingual logos in Tehran. Unfortunately I lost those photos in a hard-disk crash tragedy. I'll start again someday...) Ok, let's drop the RTL logo. I agree that this is not a good idea Firefox. Probably we should try making a RTL tango icon set, and see if it worth. What about the Arabic logotype? Here are some real-world examples about this issue: http://www.spreadfirefox.com/node/2225 http://system.ir/modules/firefox/banners.php So maybe we can ask it this way: "Do you want فایرفاکس (Firefox in Perso-Arabic script) have a common look (font, color, etc) or not?" IMHO, it's important.
(In reply to comment #12) > So maybe we can ask it this way: "Do you want فایرفاکس (Firefox in > Perso-Arabic script) have a common look (font, color, etc) or not?" > > IMHO, it's important. I agree, and I think this logo <http://firefox.ir/images/firefox-ir.14.01.480px.png> looks quite good and preserves some of the typeface characteristics of the original logo.
Just a comment from the peanut, er, hummus, gallery: fwiw, I think the logotype looks superb. It looks and feels like Firefox instantly, and it adds that professional touch that so many of the major brands have in the Middle East.
Agreed that the this version of the logo looks very nice and professionally done. However, we have a brand policy (which is governed by our trademark policy) of not altering the logo in any way, even for different locales. This is a pretty standard thing for just about every company I can think of...our logo is intended to transcend international boundaries, and I think creating multiple localized versions would diminish the overall impact of having a single consistent one. So, I appreciate the thought and effort that has gone into this but I have to mark it as a Won't Fix.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
On a recent trip to Dubai I observed a lot of the way international companies are handling this. Rolex, I think Macdonald's, and several other companies combine the wordmark in both English(Latin/Roman) characters and in Arabic. When you think about this it makes a lot of sense. A person that knows only Arabic characters wouldn't easily know how to pronounce "Firefox" You would have to know a bit of a Latin Based language to recognize the letters and sound out the name. Being able to say the brand name and talk about it is the first step in recognition of the brand and possibly trying the browser. I'll attach a mochup if an idea that we might try to expand recognition of the Firefox brand in Arabic regions, and we could consider this in other regions where Latin/Roman characters are not as likely to be recognized.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
here is the Rolex Office Towers example. "Rolex" in Latin Characters on the Left Tower "Rolex" in Arabic Characters on the Right Tower http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Middle_East/United_Arab_Emirates/photo823829.htm
Here is are pics of the macdonalds and burger king examples http://everything-everywhere.com/2009/01/10/mcemirates-mcdonalds-in-dubai/
Indeed. Behnam and I were in Dubai and Tehran last year too and took photos of many many top brands using localized versions of their marks. Behnam, care to upload those finally?
as the logo redesign is going on we could also consider making the wordmark and world logo pieces modular and "combinable" like shown in this attachment
so the revised proposal might be to: 1) leave the firefox world logo graphic as one single worldwide brand representation. 2) Have one wordmark of "Firefox" in Latin/Roman characters 3) Allow other to construct and propose for approval alturnate wordmarks where there is a signficant difference and diversion from Latin/Roman characters in the word "Firefox" This would include Arabic as one example. How many languages might propose other non-Latin/Roman based wordmarks if we did something like this?
one more addtion to the 3 items above. 4) These international logos would always show the Latin/Roman wordmark with the alturnate character wordmark as the examples shown in the examples from comments 17-21 This last one helps to build worldwide recognition of both the wordmark and graphic branding.
I like your proposal, and am piling on to share some photos I also took recently while in Iran. These are the Coca-Cola, Sprite, and Fanta brands with English on one side of the bottle, and Persian on the other.
The Coke, Sprite, Fanta seems a bit different strategy. Its more replacement of the wordmark, rather than the Rolex, Macdonalds, Burger King examples where the Arabic wordmark is additive to the original branding. We could go either way but I think I'd prefer additive as mentioned in comment 23. I was thinking in the back of my mind there might be some definition of "language families" and that number might be relatively small handful to keep the problem of "too many logos to produce and manage" under control. There are in fact some definitions of language families, and the lists are a lot bigger than I might have expected. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_family http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_language_families We don't have localizations in all those language families so that cuts down the list a bit. It would be helpful if we could achieve the wordmark brand recognition without doing 70+ graphic wordmarks that tracks with the number of offical firefox locales, but maybe that where this would end up.
maybe this list can help to do the estimating. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html I'm thinking that where the characters in the left hand column differ greatly from those in the second column those would be the canididates for localized wordmark "Firefox" graphics that are more readable and pronounceable in the locale. Arabic Belarusian, Bulgarian Bengali (India), Gujarati, Hindi (India), Kannada, Marathi, Punjabi, Telugu Sinhala Chinese Russian, Georgian, Serbian, Ukrainian Mongolian Greek, Macedonian Japanese Korean Thai I'm not fluent in any of these languages or others on the all.html list so we defintely need more input here to understand if the the wordmark graphics make sense in these locales, and if or where a common wordmark might be shared across a language family.
As for Hebrew, most people can read Latin letters, but some groups are unable to pronounce these letters. We are using "Firefox" in everything official but localized brand name is in use as an unofficial name on our websites. We are getting search engines traffic for both keywords, which is probably what people are expecting the brand name to be. As for the logo image, we are not seeing mirrored logos in every street corner, and I'm not sure if such thing exists in other countries as well. It might be good idea to consider adding email@example.com to the discussion...
I think that scripts/writing systems are more relevant than language families here. Here's a first cut at grouping the list from comment 26 by common script: Cyrillic: Belarusian, Bulgarian, Macedonian, Mongolian, Russian, Serbian, Ukrainian Devanagari: Hindi, Marathi > we > defintely need more input here to understand if the the wordmark graphics make > sense in these locales, and if or where a common wordmark might be shared > across a language family. Agreed. As an example, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/be/b/bc/Wiki.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/bg/b/bc/Wiki.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/sr/b/bc/Wiki.png and http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ru/b/bc/Wiki.png are all in Cyrillic, and all different.
(In reply to comment #27) > As for the logo image, we are not seeing mirrored logos in every street corner, > and I'm not sure if such thing exists in other countries as well. I don't know about every street corner, but they certainly exist. http://cache.virtualtourist.com/1/2563900-From_Right_to_Left-Israel.jpg and http://www.hayadan.org.il/images/content1/17482141-L-dadicable.JPG are two random examples.
(In reply to comment #29) > I don't know about every street corner, but they certainly exist. > http://cache.virtualtourist.com/1/2563900-From_Right_to_Left-Israel.jpg and > http://www.hayadan.org.il/images/content1/17482141-L-dadicable.JPG are two > random examples. Still, that's a localized text in the same font used by the English text, not a mirrored logo as in attachment 282384 [details]. Imagine how strange the logo of Nike will be in case it is mirrored - I've checked, and at least 'fa' and 'he' didn't mirrored their logo (according to wikipedia).
(In reply to comment #28) > I think that scripts/writing systems are more relevant than language families > here. Here's a first cut at grouping the list from comment 26 by common script: Something written in one script is not necessarily correct for all languages using that script. For example, Firefox is transliterated into Arabic as فايرفوکس, while it's transliterated as فایرفاکس in Persian (and both languages use the Arabic script). It's not that the transliteration in Arabic is not readable in Persian (or vice versa), it's just that different pronuncations could potentially lead to different transliterations.
(In reply to comment #27) > It might be good idea to consider adding firstname.lastname@example.org to the > discussion... Yeah, let's do that.
Assigning this to me...Chofmann, let's talk soon about some of these details. We'll probably want to open up a new, more general bug for this topic at some point (but let's hold off for the moment). Thanks all...lots of great input and ideas here!
Assignee: pkim → jslater
Summary: Arabic Logotype for Firefox → Arabic Logotype for Firefox wordmark brand recognition in non-Roman/Latin scripts/writing systems
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.