Re: Logos proposal

[Fotios Kasolis]

On Jun 15, 2010, at 3:15 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:

On 14 June 2010 17:02, Fotios Kasolis <address@hidden> wrote:

What about those?

How about instead O\mathbb{C}^\mathrm{T}\forall\nu\epsilon

I.e. just pass the mathbb to C instead of O, suggesting the complex
numbers (\mathbb{O} isn't as common as \mathbb{C}). The T is nice,
suggests transpose.

What i did not like about your suggestion is

1) O is italic in your example which i do not prefer. If you want something italic i suggest \mathcal{O} (I prefer non italic characters \text{O} is fine for me or \mathbb{O} as it is).

2) Then, having the transpose of the set of complex numbers does not give the matrix oriented character i wanted to mention through

\text{C}^\mathrm{T} (it can not be \mathbf{C} due to overpopulated pixel coverage of bold symbols)

3) Moreover, there is this non-homogenous distribution of pixels (many for 4 first characters and then lower \nu\epsilon that make it feel strange:D since the balance is already a bit strange due to ^\text{T} or ^\mathrm{T}).

The purpose of \mathcal{O} was not to have math but to state a relatively unique symbol (i was glad that math is not populated by \mathbb{O}).

Try the following (i like all of them) 

1) \mathcal{O}\text{C}^\mathrm{T}\forall\beta\mathcal{E}

2) \mathbb{O}\text{C}^\text{T}\forall\vec{\mathcal{V}}\exists

3) \mathbb{O}\text{C}^\text{T}\forall\vec{\mathcal{V}}e

/Fotios