|
| empathy_m wrote:
| Eric Meyer's posts about his daughter's illness, and the family's
| lifelong process of grieving afterward, are heartbreaking. It's
| arresting, gripping writing. It's wonderful and awful. Hug your
| loved ones tight.
| https://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/category/personal/rebecca...
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Those posts are definitely not for everyone. It is a deep dive
| into the emotions of a grieving father for over a decade.
|
| I really hope that man can find peace.
| kaelig wrote:
| "wonderful and awful" is such a brilliant way to capture this.
| Thank you
| arrowsmith wrote:
| Ouch. As a father, that was a gutpunch. Dark, haunting,
| dripping with grief and pain, but beautifully written and very
| haunting.
|
| I can't imagine anything worse than what that guy has been
| through.
|
| I'm holding my sleeping baby as I write this and I just hugged
| him even tighter. Thanks for sharing.
| ericwood wrote:
| Thank you for linking this. I read bits and pieces of this as
| it was happening but it never fully registered for me at 24.
| I'm sitting here 10 years later at 34 having lost our son at 23
| weeks. His due date was this past week. It's affected me in
| ways that still surprise, befuddle, and sometimes scare me. I
| cannot even begin to fathom what he's been through; the most
| recent blog post has me in tears.
|
| I have really strong memories of learning HTML, CSS, and
| javascript in high school, and spending time in the school
| library picking apart css/edge. It felt like the dawn of a new
| era, I was in awe of the things I saw there. I built more than
| a few sites trying to get my head around the complexispiral
| demo, and spent countless hours diving into resources I found
| there (like A List Apart! I will never forget the suckerfish
| drop-downs). This is one of the few moments I have such vivid
| memories of that were directly responsible me for pursuing
| computer engineering and ultimately going so far into UI/UX and
| the web. I've never written it out this explicitly but: thank
| you for everything, Eric.
| Cordiali wrote:
| I hope every day is a bit easier than the last for you.
| ten13 wrote:
| Thank you for sharing, Eric. It's been a few years now for me
| since we lost our son before I ever had the chance to meet
| him and I'm not sure it's any easier. Stories like yours and
| that of others help us all know we're not alone in our grief
| though so I encourage you to keep sharing and telling your
| story.
| whatever1 wrote:
| How can the game be so unfair for some? People don't deserve
| this.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| Makes you think how life so easily and randomly can be so
| different irrespective of who you are or what you do to
| affect you forever.
| agumonkey wrote:
| it's indeed strange to realize that life / universe can
| crunch everything brainlessly in some spot while everything
| else is colorful around
| czhu12 wrote:
| Having never had children myself, his writing moved me in a way
| that I struggle to comprehend. I spent my 2 hour commute
| reading through all of his writing on his time, and subsequent
| grief of his daughter, starting here:
| https://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2008/06/18/welcome-2/
|
| I found this piece particularly moving, and brought me to
| tears:
|
| https://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2014/06/10/so-many-nevers...
| graypegg wrote:
| It'll be interesting to see where we end up using this. I don't
| honestly see the CSS3 shield this is meant to replace very often
| anymore.
|
| Probably the place where it'll be seen the most is in IDE file
| trees, where I'm a bit worried it'll just look like a little
| purple blob
| kijin wrote:
| File Browser / Finder maybe, but the text inside the boxes are
| too small for IDE file trees.
|
| VS Code shows "JS" in yellow text without the box, against a
| dark background. CSS is just a blue hash symbol. Maybe they'll
| change the color to rebeccapurple, but I don't think there's
| room for a box around the symbol.
| voat wrote:
| For some reason, I was under the impression that the blue shield
| was the css logo.
|
| But after looking at it, I realized that it was just for CSS 3
| and I'm not sure if it was even official?
| swayvil wrote:
| It's a nice purple.
| usbsea wrote:
| A simple one too - it would be on a 216 colour pallete using
| six values for each of R, G and B.
|
| R = 1/5
|
| G = 2/5
|
| B = 3/5
|
| Edit: of course that makes sense it is probably a "web safe"
| one
| kijin wrote:
| If it's such a simple combination, I wonder why it wasn't
| officially named until 2014. CSS has had names for all sorts
| of weird colors since forever.
| duskwuff wrote:
| Most CSS color names were inherited from the X11 color list
| [1], which, in turn, sourced its colors from a weird
| mixture of Crayola crayons, paint samples, and
| idiosyncratic personal choices [2]. It's a mess.
|
| [1]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/blob/mas
| ter/di...
|
| [2]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-
| style/2014Mar/0272....
| labster wrote:
| Maybe it wasn't named so that long after people like me
| pass from memory for good, people will still speak of
| Rebecca and of the love we showed her.
| otteromkram wrote:
| > Update 22 Jun 14: the proposal was approved by the CSS WG and
| added to the CSS4 Colors module. Patches to web browsers have
| already happened in nightly builds. (I'm just now catching up on
| this after the unexpected death of Kat's father early Saturday
| morning.)
|
| Mr. Meyer certainly had a rough 2014.
|
| Kudos to him and all his CSS contributions over the years. I hope
| he has been able to find some solace since then.
| aryonoco wrote:
| I would say he hasn't, considering a few months ago he wrote "A
| Decade Later, A Decade Lost"
| https://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2024/06/07/a-decade-later...
|
| And I can't blame him. They say no parent should see their
| child die, and that's certainly true; but especially no parent
| should see their 6 year old child die of brain cancer. Humans
| are not built to withstand that.
| pstuart wrote:
| I didn't expect a logo update to bring tears to my eyes.
| dang wrote:
| Related. Others?
|
| _Adding 'rebeccapurple' color to CSS Color Level 4 (2014)_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34186932 - Dec 2022 (1
| comment)
|
| _Adding 'rebeccapurple' color to CSS Color Level 4 (2014)_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9565503 - May 2015 (33
| comments)
|
| _Adding 'rebeccapurple' color to CSS Color Level 4_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7924677 - June 2014 (25
| comments)
|
| _In memory of Rebecca Alison Meyer_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7863890 - June 2014 (68
| comments)
| brianzelip wrote:
| An official logo for CSS -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42124786 - November 2024
| WD-42 wrote:
| I really don't like these logos that are boxes with text in the
| lower right. The post cites a "common design language" with other
| tech but this has to be the most low effort language imaginable.
| kijin wrote:
| I think Adobe started this trend. A box with "Ps" inside for
| Photoshop, "Lr" for Lightroom, etc. for all their products.
|
| An entire generation of web designers grew up with their heads
| stuck in the Adobe ecosystem, so this must look like the gold
| standard to them.
|
| At least Adobe made an effort to make their logos look like
| symbols on the periodic table.
| hxii wrote:
| To me these made sense, as I was able to quickly, visually
| distinguish PhotoShop by the "PS" letters instead of trying
| to decipher a 32x32 logo.
| usbsea wrote:
| You prefer these?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5#/media/File:HTML5_logo_a...
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CSS3_logo_and_wordmark.sv...
| ohmahjong wrote:
| Not who you are replying to, but I started learning HTML/CSS
| right when HTML5 and CSS3 had just come out, so I do have
| somewhat of a soft spot for these
| wruza wrote:
| Is this the only choice we have?
| NBJack wrote:
| They are certainly more colorblind and vision impairment
| friendly to be honest.
| HL33tibCe7 wrote:
| What is color blind unfriendly about the new logos
| precisely? Which variant of color blindness will not be
| able to read them?
|
| Which visual impairment exactly will find it easier to
| parse the previous logos (which are a mess of design
| scarcely related to the actual technology name) than the
| current ones, which contain thick bold text indicating
| exactly what the technology is called?
| geoffpado wrote:
| Yes.
| WD-42 wrote:
| Yes.
| brailsafe wrote:
| Absolutely prefer these
| cyborgx7 wrote:
| They're so much nicer.
| oneeyedpigeon wrote:
| They remind me way too much of dark-arts virus checker,
| disk cleaner BS.
| readthenotes1 wrote:
| the design language is really "keep it inside the box, don't
| worry about your self-imposed solution constraints"
| lemagedurage wrote:
| They could've added some character by letting the text overflow
| the box :)
| geon wrote:
| The rounded corners was a suitable reference to css, I think.
| cantSpellSober wrote:
| That's been the unofficial "logo for CSS" for years:
| https://i0.wp.com/css-tricks.com/wp-
| content/uploads/2017/06/...
|
| It appears this option was discussed: https://github.com/CSS-
| Next/css-next/issues/105#issuecomment...
| tannhaeuser wrote:
| You're absolutely right, especially considering the canonical
| CSS-in-a-box logo has long been established [1], and they
| should really embrace it if they had any sense of humor.
|
| Perhaps those brutalist logos were designed specifically such
| that they could be rendered using CSS itself? Though I could
| understand why they'd want to distance themselves from the old
| "shield" logo that turned out to signify shielding "browser
| vendors" from broad implementation of CSS renderers and to keep
| a niche of job security at W3C, Inc. due to rampant and
| unwarranted complexity, but in any case was burnt by being
| placed next to vulgar metalhand vectors, not to speak of being
| culturally discriminative when viewed in a "woke"
| interpretation.
|
| [1]:
| https://ih0.redbubble.net/image.13378023.4114/raf,750x1000,0...
| thiht wrote:
| > especially considering the canonical CSS-in-a-box logo has
| long been established
|
| Is this a joke? I've never seen it in my life, not even sure
| where you're pulling it from
| somat wrote:
| Disagree, but then again my soulless engineer's heart has close
| to zero tolerance for design for design's sake, so what do I
| know?
|
| The most important part about convoying that an item is CSS is
| including the letters CSS. So while I am a little disgusted
| they wasted time on an icon at all, I will admit that many of
| our design language structures demand an icon. So I am somewhat
| relieved they managed to dodge the design for design's sake
| crowd and picked the best possible one. A non-descript box with
| the letters CSS in it.
| oneeyedpigeon wrote:
| "Non-descript" is unfair - it has 3 rounded corners!
| kalleboo wrote:
| They should have centered the text in it both vertically and
| horizontally
| reddalo wrote:
| It's impossible to do that with CSS :)
| matsemann wrote:
| Could've used this classic CSS joke as the logo https://i.e
| tsystatic.com/21468781/r/il/426363/2712010149/il_...
| egypturnash wrote:
| Yeah these are programmer art.
|
| Or clones of Adobe's lame branding.
| fenomas wrote:
| I once saw an interview with an apparently well-known logo
| designer, who said something to the effect of: "When somebody
| sees my work and says 'that's nothing, anybody could make
| that', that means they instantly got the logo, understood its
| structure, with no distraction. That's what it's meant to do,
| so to me it's a compliment."
|
| Whether that applies here is naturally subjective, but hearing
| that changed how I look at logo designs a bit.
| latexr wrote:
| There's a limit to that. By that token, every logo in
| existence could be a white square with black text on it.
| Clearly they are not, because people understand the need for
| some differentiation. Even in this case, the logos benefit
| from having colour.
|
| And they're not even consistent. Three of them are squares,
| two of them are different shapes, and despite the simplicity
| even something as trivial as the font size and spacing isn't
| uniform.
| spiffytech wrote:
| While they aren't snazzy, they do have some benefits that often
| go unconsidered:
|
| Logos are sometimes printed on shirts (in monochrome, or where
| rich coloring costs extra), or embroidered onto hats, or read
| at a distance (like conference booth posters), or printed to
| B/W official letterhead, or scaled down for an icon pack. A 3rd
| party will include a logo on something with a preexisting
| style, and it should look okay there.
|
| A logo which is structurally simple and uses few colors can be
| easily adapted to these scenarios -- printed in black-and-
| white, or as an outline without solid colors.
| asddubs wrote:
| >The design follows the design language of the logos of other web
| technologies like JavaScript, TypeScript, and WebAssembly.
|
| and yet it's 5 logos with 3 different font sizes and at least 3
| different font faces
|
| 3 of which are perfect rectangles, and 2 of which are slight
| variations on rectangles
|
| i guess it perfectly represents the ecosystem, no notes
| globalise83 wrote:
| This is the evolution of "Design by committee" to "Design by 3
| committees"
| Maken wrote:
| To fully represent HTML, they should be displayed with sightly
| different fonts and kerning in each operating system.
| langsoul-com wrote:
| > The color was originally going to be called beccapurple, but
| Meyer asked that it instead be named rebeccapurple, as his
| daughter had wanted to be called Rebecca once she had turned six.
| She had said that Becca was a "baby name," and that once she had
| turned six, she wanted to be called Rebecca. As Eric Meyer put
| it, "She made it to six. For almost twelve hours, she was six. So
| Rebecca it is and must be."
|
| Wasn't expecting tears over a colour
| jvm___ wrote:
| ..in 2014 in honor of Eric Meyer's daughter, Rebecca, who
| passed away at the age of six on her birthday from brain
| cancer.
| shahzaibmushtaq wrote:
| I will never ever forget this color name and the story behind it
| for the rest of my life.
| Crazyontap wrote:
| I think we're stretching the definition of "logos" here. Just
| sticking text in a square doesn't make it a true logo.
|
| Think of Apple or Nike, those are real logos. The recent logos
| and icons, including apps like Photoshop's, seem more like we're
| prioritizing metrics over creativity.
| oneeyedpigeon wrote:
| Tell Gap (and all the rest).
| striking wrote:
| What about those of IBM, Facebook, Google, Netflix, or Uber?
| They're just words, with gentle stylization. Sometimes their
| logos take on the shape of a single letter in a box, which by
| your standards might even be less creative.
|
| But there are reasons for this. Plain wordmarks are high-
| contrast and easy to read almost by default, and they work
| great with groups that aren't already aware of your brand. Or
| as Netflix puts it
| (https://brand.netflix.com/en/assets/logos/),
|
| > The Wordmark remains an essential identifier of our brand.
| While our goal is to lead with the N Symbol, we enlist the
| Wordmark to ensure brand recognition in low-awareness markets
| or when production limits the use of color.
|
| CSS doesn't have a ton of brand awareness. Making something
| akin to the Nike Swoosh for CSS won't catch on, it's not like
| they have the money to flood your Instagram feed with it and
| force that brand recognition on you.
|
| Going back to Netflix why would they use a single gently
| stylized letter where possible? Well,
|
| > In high-awareness markets, we lead with the N Symbol. There
| is power in owning a letter of the alphabet: it's universal and
| instantly identifiable as shorthand for our brand.
|
| That's right. Netflix wants to own the letter N. I think "CSS"
| is in the same position: owning a combination of three letters
| is a power move. That's the most valuable thing about the "CSS
| brand," if ever there were one, so why not lead with it?
|
| But maybe your opinion is still that all of these designers are
| full of it (apparently including Paul Rand).
| thiht wrote:
| This is definitely a logo, by all definitions of the word. It's
| not just "text in a box", it's:
|
| - text, with a specific font, position, size, weight
|
| - a specific color
|
| - a box radius in 3 corners
|
| - some variants
|
| By your definition, the Coca Cola logo is not a logo because
| it's "just text"
| QuentinCh wrote:
| I am in a train and I stopped reading because I was crying too
| much. The fact that the reminder of this story hides in plain
| sight, in the form of a named CSS color, makes it even more
| touching for some reason.
| Ecco wrote:
| Without even judging the overall design (personally I don't mind
| the simplicity), why on earth do they use such inconsistent
| fonts? 3 different font sizes (and maybe also mismatching
| horizontal spacings) for 5 assorted logos??? This is insane...
| cachvico wrote:
| It's incredibly ironic
| oneeyedpigeon wrote:
| You want them to be even _less_ distinctive? Personally, I
| think they should lean into that more and embrace the context:
| e.g. sans-serif for CSS, monospace for JS, serif for HTML.
| latexr wrote:
| The current logos are both uninteresting and badly
| constructed. At least either make them consistent (less
| distinctive but you can appreciate them as thought out as
| part of a family) or wildly different (more distinctive but
| not as clear they're part of a family). This middle ground is
| the worst of all possible options.
| usrusr wrote:
| Because they are still logos, not one list of short acronyms
| that just happens to be rendered in a specific way?
|
| I really think it's fine: the web assembly gets to play with
| its parallels between W and A, JS gets to mirror the J's
| bottom-bend in its S (TS tagging along because those two really
| are more than just accidental neighbors), whereas CSS can
| indulge in summetry with its twin S by making them internally
| symmetric themselves. A logo that contains an acronym isn't
| really a logo when the characters are just picked from some
| font instead of tailored as part of the logo.
| latexr wrote:
| > Because they are still logos, not one list of short
| acronyms that just happens to be rendered in a specific way?
|
| Consistency still matters. If you're going through the
| trouble of making logos similar so they are understood as
| part of a family, don't give up half way.
| pino82 wrote:
| Why does it include TS? I would never have called it a 'web
| technology'. A lot of people use it in their tech stack, but
| fortunately, the browser does not even understand it, right?
| qark wrote:
| Is there any link that explains why this particular shade of
| purple was chosen to represent Rebecca?
| felbane wrote:
| Purple was her favorite color. #639 is shorthand for about the
| purplest purple you can make with RGB. Jeff Zeldman proposed
| the color name on Twitter and in a blog post shortly after she
| died, and it understandably caught on.
| npteljes wrote:
| I used rebeccapurple a lot as well, unknowing of the touching
| story behind it. I coded CSS by hand (back in like 2010), and for
| placeholders, I used the simple colors I knew, like "green" or
| "blue". And "red", of course, too. But when typing "re" for
| "red", I noticed that it autocompletes to "rebeccapurple", which
| amused me, since I thought it's kind of a nonsense to have a
| color named like that. Over time, I used it a lot, and it became
| a kind of a favorite of mine.
| gedy wrote:
| This would have been quite funny instead:
|
| https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.1851735303.3881/flat,750x,07...
| atlih wrote:
| <3
| pmkary wrote:
| The bar for a logo has become so low. I don't understand how we
| reached here and everyone are happy about it.
| kmeisthax wrote:
| GNU Rebecca Meyer
| laserstrahl wrote:
| https://github.com/vic/rebecca-theme I thought it derrives from
| this.
|
| Haha
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-11-17 14:00 UTC) |