Shibboleth Developers

[Tom Scavo <>]

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Chad La Joie 
<>
 wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 16:08, Cantor, Scott E. 
> <>
>  wrote:
>> Perhaps the better question would be what are the appropriate aspect
>> ratios in UI theory, and what resolution image would be usable at a decent
>> range of sizes so as to defer this to the UI.
>
> Rod and I asked a number of UI experts and the answer we got back is
> that there is no standard image dimensions, aspect ratio(s), or size
> for such logos.

There may be no standard or agreement on aspect ratios or sizes of
logos, but we're about ready to ask large numbers of people to link to
logos in metadata world-wide so it seems to me we have to put a stake
in the ground. Otherwise we'll end up with a bunch of unusable junk
and no progress will have been made.

The only thing I feel confident recommending is landscape mode images
(width > height). Seems everything else is a shot in the dark at this
point.

AFAICT the aspect ratios of logos (in theory and in practice) are all
over the map. If I had to make a recommendation, it would be 16:9
(merely because that rectangle is commonplace today).

If I were lining up a bunch of images horizontally on a page, I would
want all the images to have a minimum height so I could scale them
down to that height or less. Same thing if I wanted to stack a bunch
of images vertically where each horizontal band had a fixed height. So
it seems we need a minimum height. What should that be? If I had to
guess, I'd say 100 pixels.

Given those two criteria, a 177x100 pixel image would be optimal...but
hey, don't take my word for it, I'm not a graphic artist so what do I
know.

Are there intended uses of logos on any of the user interface pages
that would suggest other size criteria?

Tom