[14:25] <thorwil> kwwii: what's up with the ubuntu logo SVGs as linked from the wiki? the letters are full of unnecessary nodes. looks like bad automated tracing. at least i would hope no person would ever do it this way
[14:27] <_MMA_> thorwil: Personally I just use the circle of friends image and then use the font for text.
[14:28] <thorwil> _MMA_: the ubuntu title font as packaged for hardy doesn't match the official logo font
[14:29] <_MMA_> Ive just grabbed it from the web. How doesnt it match?
[14:30] <thorwil> _MMA_: the ttf is edgier and runs much narrower
[14:31] <_MMA_> Can you link me to what SVG you're talking about from the wiki?
[14:33] <thorwil> _MMA_: from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Official
[14:34] <thorwil> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Official?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=UbuntuLogo.svg
[14:37] <_MMA_> thorwil: Id just use the font and throw a stroke around it if you're unhappy with the thickness. Im sure the Xubuntu and I know the (old) Ubuntu Studio logos were done with the font. Nobody complained.
[14:41] <thorwil> _MMA_: oh common, take that svg into inkscape, place ubuntu in title font right next to it and try to line it up. i don't think random variations in the ubuntu type are acceptable from a branding and typography point of view
[14:41] <thorwil> but here we are, the damage is done
[14:43] <_MMA_> thorwil: Really. We don't have much of a choice. You could start a thread on the ML to further clean-up/standardize the artwork. Its not uncommon for things like this to go through minor tweaks.
[14:44] <_MMA_> There's even a effort to make the Ubuntu font more complete. http://betatype.com/node/36
[14:54]  * thorwil tries to keep his sanity while editing an S
[14:55] <_MMA_> hahaha
[17:53] <nothlit> i don't know which versions are packaged and are in the logo, but the font itself has been cleaned up lately, the mailing list has mentions of versions with clean paths and even accents etc
[18:02] <troy_s> thorwil: The redone font set is better by an order of a magnitude.  Sad we still haven't integrated it and gotten the author to sort out the license etc.
[18:02] <thorwil> troy_s: good. an order of magnitude is required ;)
[18:03] <troy_s> thorwil: And then some.
[18:03] <troy_s> thorwil: Even the free font 'poo platter' is infinitely better.
[18:04] <thorwil> heh
[18:04] <troy_s> thorwil: I would suggest checking out the one done by the fontographer.
[18:04] <troy_s> thorwil: Have you seen poo platter?
[18:05] <thorwil> troy_s: nope. i wasn't sure it exists
[18:05] <troy_s> thorwil: Weird... I can't find it.  Abstract fonts has it in their catalogue.
[18:06] <troy_s> thorwil: Looking.
[18:06] <thorwil> dinner, bbl
[18:07] <troy_s> thorwil: Anyways, here is the redone one: http://betatype.com/node/36
[18:45] <thorwil> troy_s: is there a downlaod link hidden somewhere?
[18:45] <troy_s> thorwil: From that blog page?
[18:46] <thorwil> yes
[18:46] <troy_s> thorwil: It was easily downloadable last time I looked there, but maybe not in that update page.
[18:46] <troy_s> thorwil: It's quite a bit better than the rather hacky title ttf - as you can probably see.
[19:21] <troy_s> thorwil: Does Ardour offer sequencing?
[19:22] <thorwil> troy_s: audio sequencing yes. no midi, allthough that is in the works
[19:22] <troy_s> thorwil: Hrm.  So what would you recommend for simple midi sequencing loops?
[19:23] <thorwil> troy_s: seq24
[19:23] <troy_s> thorwil: Is it relatively easy to use for a novice audience?
[19:24] <thorwil> troy_s: yes and no. it's simple in structure and made for loops. but editing notes is a bit odd
[19:24] <thorwil> troy_s: i don't remember how it works exactly, lets just say that you should try all 3 mouse buttons if you want to draw notes
[19:24] <troy_s> thorwil: How does Rosegarden rate in your opinion?
[19:25] <thorwil> troy_s: i never managed to make it talk to a softsynth
[19:25] <troy_s> (and sorry, I am asking on behalf of someone else.  I am not a music guy.)
[19:25] <thorwil> troy_s: both rosegarden and muse are more complex than seq24 and _not_ made for loops
[19:25] <troy_s> thorwil: Ok that answers that question.
[19:26] <troy_s> thorwil: Thanks a million.
[19:26] <thorwil> troy_s: np
[19:26] <troy_s> thorwil: Erm... one more:  What one works best in the Ardour workflow?
[19:26] <troy_s> (loop or otherwise)
[19:27] <thorwil> troy_s: doesn't matter, i'd say. but i'm only really familiar with muse
[19:28] <thorwil> troy_s: both muse and rosegarden have audio capabilities. which suffice if you don't need precise audio editing or tricky routing
[19:29] <troy_s> thorwil: Thanks again.