<sect1 id="identity-project-structure">

    <title>Corporate Structure</title>

    <para>
        &TCP; corporate structure is based on a &MCVIS;. In this
        configuration, one unique name and one unique visual style is
        used in all visual manifestation &TCP; is made of.
    </para>

    <para>
        In a monolithic corporate visual identity structure, internal
        and external stakeholders use to feel a strong sensation of
        uniformity, orientation, and identification with the
        organization. No matter if you are visiting web sites, using
        the distribution, or acting on social events, the one unique
        name and one unique visual style connects them all to say:
        Hey! we are all part of &TCP;.
    </para>

    <para>
        Other corporate structures for &TCP; have been considered as
        well. Such is the case of producing one different visual style
        for each major release of &TCD;. This structure isn't
        inconvenient at all, but some visual contradictions could be
        introduced if it isn't applied correctly and we need to be
        aware of it. To apply it correctly, we need to know what &TCP;
        is made of. 
    </para>

    <para>
        &TCP;, as organization, is mainly made of (but not limited to)
        three visual manifestions: &TCD;, &TCW; and &TCS;.  Inside
        &TCD; visual manifestations, &TCP; maintains near to four
        different major releases of &TCD;, parallely in time.
        However, inside &TCW; visual manifestations, the content is
        produced for no specific release information (e.g., there is
        no a complete web site for each major release of &TCD;
        individually, but one web site to cover them all).  Likewise,
        the content produced in &TCS; is industrially created for no
        specific release, but &TCP; in general.
    </para>

    <para>
        In order to produce the &TCPMCVIS; correctly, we need to
        concider all the visual manifestations &TCP; is made of, not
        just one of them.  If one different visual style is
        implemented for each major release of &TCD;, which one of
        those different visual styles would be used to cover the
        remaining visual manifestations &TCP; is made of (e.g., &TCW;
        and &TCS;)?
    </para>

    <para>
        Probably you are thinking: yes, I see your point, but &TCBRAND;
        connects them all already, why would we need to join them up
        into the same visual style too, isn't it more work to do, and
        harder to maintain?
    </para>

    <para>
        Harder to maintain, more work to do, probably. Specially when
        you consider that &TCP; has proven stability and consistency
        through time and, that, certainly, didn't come through
        swinging magical wands or something but hardly working out to
        automate tasks and providing maintainance through time.  With
        that in mind, we consider &TCPCVIS; must be consequent with
        such stability and consistency tradition.  It is true that
        &TCBRAND; does connect all the visual manifestations it is present
        on, but that connection is strengthened if one unique visual
        style backups it.  In fact, whatever thing you do to strength
        the visual connection among &TCP; visual manifestations would
        be very good in favor of &TCP; recognition.
    </para>

    <para>
        Obviously, having just one visual style in all visual
        manifestations for eternity would be a very boring thing and
        would give the idea of a visually dead project. So, there is
        no problem on creating a brand new visual style for each new
        major release of &TCD;, in order to refresh &TCD; visual
        style; the problem itself is in not propagating the brand new
        visual style created for the new release of &TCD; to all other
        visual manifestations &TCP; is made of, in a way &TCP; could
        be recognized no matter what visual manifestation be in front
        of us. Such lack of uniformity is what introduces the visual
        contradition we are precisely trying to solve by mean of
        themes production in &TCAR;.
    </para>

</sect1>