Blame Documentation/Models/Docbook/Tcar-ug/Identity/Project/structure.docbook

750966
<sect1 id="identity-project-structure">
de4714
0acfb2
    <title>Corporate Structure</title>
de4714
de4714
    <para>
de4714
        &TC;; corporate structure is based on a &MCVIS;. In this
de4714
        configuration, one unique name and one unique visual style is
de4714
        used in all visual manifestation &TC;; is made of.
de4714
    </para>
de4714
de4714
    <para>
de4714
        In a monolithic corporate visual identity structure, internal
de4714
        and external stakeholders use to feel a strong sensation of
de4714
        uniformity, orientation, and identification with the
de4714
        organization. No matter if you are visiting web sites, using
de4714
        the distribution, or acting on social events, the one unique
de4714
        name and one unique visual style connects them all to say:
de4714
        Hey! we are all part of &TC;;.
de4714
    </para>
de4714
de4714
    <para>
de4714
        Other corporate structures for &TC;; have been considered as
de4714
        well. Such is the case of producing one different visual style
de4714
        for each major release of &TC;;. This structure isn't
de4714
        inconvenient at all, but some visual contradictions could be
de4714
        introduced if it isn't applied correctly and we need to be
de4714
        aware of it. To apply it correctly, we need to know what &TC;;
de4714
        is made of. 
de4714
    </para>
de4714
de4714
    <para>
de4714
        &TC;;, as organization, is mainly made of (but not limited to)
de4714
        three visual manifestions: &TC;;, &TC;; and &TC;;.  Inside
de4714
        &TC;; visual manifestations, &TC;; maintains near to four
de4714
        different major releases of &TC;;, parallely in time.
de4714
        However, inside &TC;; visual manifestations, the content is
de4714
        produced for no specific release information (e.g., there is
de4714
        no a complete web site for each major release of &TC;;
de4714
        individually, but one web site to cover them all).  Likewise,
de4714
        the content produced in &TC;; is industrially created for no
de4714
        specific release, but &TC;; in general.
de4714
    </para>
de4714
de4714
    <para>
de4714
        In order to produce the &TCPMCVIS; correctly, we need to
de4714
        concider all the visual manifestations &TC;; is made of, not
de4714
        just one of them.  If one different visual style is
de4714
        implemented for each major release of &TC;;, which one of
de4714
        those different visual styles would be used to cover the
de4714
        remaining visual manifestations &TC;; is made of (e.g., &TC;;
de4714
        and &TC;;)?
de4714
    </para>
de4714
de4714
    <para>
ce09e1
        Probably you are thinking: yes, I see your point, but &TCBRAND;
de4714
        connects them all already, why would we need to join them up
de4714
        into the same visual style too, isn't it more work to do, and
de4714
        harder to maintain?
de4714
    </para>
de4714
de4714
    <para>
de4714
        Harder to maintain, more work to do, probably. Specially when
de4714
        you consider that &TC;; has proven stability and consistency
de4714
        through time and, that, certainly, didn't come through
de4714
        swinging magical wands or something but hardly working out to
de4714
        automate tasks and providing maintainance through time.  With
de4714
        that in mind, we consider &TCPCVIS; must be consequent with
de4714
        such stability and consistency tradition.  It is true that
ce09e1
        &TCBRAND; does connect all the visual manifestations it is present
de4714
        on, but that connection is strengthened if one unique visual
de4714
        style backups it.  In fact, whatever thing you do to strength
de4714
        the visual connection among &TC;; visual manifestations would
de4714
        be very good in favor of &TC;; recognition.
de4714
    </para>
de4714
de4714
    <para>
de4714
        Obviously, having just one visual style in all visual
de4714
        manifestations for eternity would be a very boring thing and
de4714
        would give the idea of a visually dead project. So, there is
de4714
        no problem on creating a brand new visual style for each new
de4714
        major release of &TC;;, in order to refresh &TC;; visual
de4714
        style; the problem itself is in not propagating the brand new
de4714
        visual style created for the new release of &TC;; to all other
de4714
        visual manifestations &TC;; is made of, in a way &TC;; could
de4714
        be recognized no matter what visual manifestation be in front
de4714
        of us. Such lack of uniformity is what introduces the visual
de4714
        contradition we are precisely trying to solve by mean of
de4714
        themes production in &TCAR;.
de4714
    </para>
de4714
750966
</sect1>