RTL: misc\druplicon-rtl.png

Hm, yhager, levavie and friends told me (as far as I remember), that having a reversed logo or not is more of a personal preference, not an RTL rule. So this is why it was not included in the RTL sheets. I'd welcome their comments on this here.

http://ar.wikipedia.org/

the wikipedia logo is not reversed..

If Druplicon is to be featured on the right side of the page, I think it would make sense to make it face/look to the left (to move the focus into the content of the page, instead of moving it out of it). The logo of Wikipedia is unlike Druplicon in that 1) it's not anthropomorphic and 2) it doesn't have or face in any direction per se, and thus doesn't move the focus anywhere actively.

I agree with Freso. It's just a nice detail.

So lets vote or something (+1 use, -1 don't use, this rtl logo)

my vote: +1

Pasqualle, I don't see why this needs to be voted upon. So far, I have produced arguments (or, well, an argument) for having it, and I haven't seen any proper arguments against it... so it's really up to Gábor/core committers now, whether to include this or not. (I also don't know if this would require anything else than just adding the file, so I haven't tested it and thus won't be marking it RTBC.)

http://drupal.org/node/179756 which this one is dependent on is not committable in D6, so this is postponed also.

So, as this is something very, very easy to do and HEAD is currently (still) open... Let's get a decision. Gábor? Dries?

I think "branding" is more important here then abiding to personal preferences on where the Druplicon should face. As said in #1, it is definitely not an RTL requirement to flip the logo.

And again, there's the issue of the icon "leading" the focus of the visitor into or out of/away from the page. As for "branding", most humans would be able to link a reversed Druplicon to its non-reversed twin. But unless you'll budge on your opinion, I guess we might just as well agree to disagree on this point, and see what other people think. :)

Keep in mind that the following conditions need to apply for this to matter:

1.) The site is a high-traffic production site
2.) That uses the default logo
4.) And is localized
5.) To multiple languages (or they could just switch the global logo)
6.) One of which is RTL

So far we've seen exactly one use case (drupal.il), and they seem to be coping already...

I suspect this may be feature-creep.

Yeah, it's no problem to add it - I'm just wondering how many people (other than the various regional Drupal communities) will actually use Druplicon, rather than replacing it with their own logo...?

I'm not entirely convinced that this is an improvement. I'd like to better understand how other organizations, companies and projects deal with this.

The OpenBSD mascot, Puffy is similar in this regard, having a very strong left-to-right orientation.

hass: Site the site logo is a variable (as in comes from the variables table), multilingual variables solves the "logo per language" issue. And a lot of other "... per language" issues for that matter. I'll also add that I am not convinced we should flip Druplicon and ship with such a version.

This isn't a patch.

Arancaytar's list, Dries' and Goba hesitation together makes me think won't fix.