1

Hi All,

Now that several projects have been accepted and added to the project index, my own included, I started to think of ways to indicate status / inclusion in the index in the projects' README.

I spent some time poking at designing some badges, and this is what I came up with:

37
372084×288 49.6 KB

Anyone have thoughts using these? Any concerns with using badges/logos/icons in general?

1 Like
2

Sounds like a great idea to have badges for this!

I think I'd rather propose to use shields.io to drive this though, so perhaps like this?

sswg:sandbox sswg:incubating sswg:graduated

(not strongly set on colours, but I think it's good to not invent our own images perhaps)

10 Likes
3

I'm not sure. These shields are more like noise to me nowadays, I just filter them out from my field of view.

4

FWIW, I prefer the shields.io approach as well; they're a de facto standard at this point.

2 Likes
5

I'd prefer the shields as well. Nothing against your designs, but they do have a certain style to them which might not work alongside some project logos, graphic, etc. where shields are almost "style-less" and work across a broad spectrum of projects.

2 Likes
6

Even if it was, this is a valid criticism I didn't consider, and I'm welcome constructive criticism!

Especially since I lack visual design and artistic talent :sweat_smile:

7

Don’t be so hard on yourself, you’ve clearly got talent. I like your designs. Designing something that’s universally applicable is a major undertaking.

8

+1 to the shileds.io badges and thanks @Mordil for the idea! :smile:

3 Likes
9

Great idea, thank you! I also prefer the shields.io ones but don't mind the actual look that much.

10

I know what you mean, however there's a balance to be struck there.

I wish I could find a talk I recently watched on the topic, but can't seem to dig it up now; the claim was that the information gain is good to a level of around 3 or 4 shields, after that it becomes noise. The talk also claimed that "dynamic" i.e. test coverage / ci passing and general project health ones are more important than badges with e.g. version or "works on linux" which indeed become noise.

All in all, I think it's a good idea since it falls into the "project health" category which is useful to highlight, thanks for the awesome idea Nathan :)

What's next step here, should I PR the shields to https://github.com/swift-server/sswg/blob/master/process/incubation.md and offer them as "optional way to signal the projects status if you'd like to?"

While at it, any ideas for colors or these sound ok? The orange perhaps could change to maybe blue...
Orange makes it look more "danger" than yellow which it is not.

cc @tomerd

2 Likes
11

Perhaps yellow , green , then brightgreen for sandbox , incubating , and graduated?

After thinking more than a second, I realized they were too close in color and could be difficult for people to see the difference, especially vision impaired

I took a screenshot of the supported colors from shields.io and ran it through this tool: Coblis — Color Blindness Simulator – Colblindor

It seems that lightgrey, blue, and green/brightgreen provide the best contrasts for different color-blindness.

sswg:sandbox sswg:incubating sswg:graduated

12 Likes
12

These look good to me! And very nice that you checked the accessibility aspect :+1:

1 Like
13

Concur, those are excellent!

14

this is awesome, thanks for proposing!

15

PR Created: add section on recommendation of listing shields.io maturity badges by Mordil · Pull Request #23 · swift-server/sswg · GitHub

3 Likes