Logos on www.coops.tech


Sorry not to have spotted this sooner (it was added on 2017/12/05), but the new Project Management service logo:

Was red and also smaller than the others, so my non-expert Gimp editing to make it transparent and yellow has had limited success:

If someone has access to a vector original and can make a bigger one that is #FFCC531 that would be ideal :slight_smile:

Other issues (apart from all the clients and technologies without transparent backgrounds…) is that these new services don’t have logos:

  • Branding
  • Campaigns
  • Canvas
  • Community Organising
  • Fundraising
  • User Experience
  • User testing

I have added some services logo guidelines to the wiki and unless someone can add logos for these services I think we should probably un-publish them?

I heard today that Piwik has been renamed to Matomo so I have updated that on the site (name and logo).

I also wonder if we need Python as a technology twice?


I have unpublished all of the new Services that did not have logos or that did not fit with the existing templates.

The new ones that have been created also largely duplicate or overlap with other Services - e.g. Branding vs Branding and Identity.

If people are updating the site can they please respect the fact that some people have put quite a lot of time/effort/money into it and not break it.


Sorry to sound so grumpy!! Just re-read the post, and I meant to be nicer, but I’ve spent quite a long time photoshopping other people’s service logos, and don’t have time at the moment.


I can sympathise @harry, I also spent several very long evenings working on the logos when the site was first set up and I know how time consuming it is — if it didn’t take so much time sorting this out I’d have fixed all the logos with the missing transparancy already…


:slight_smile: if only there were some design co-ops in CoTech who could handle this stuff… :wink:

Duplicating the services is naughty though.


To qoute the pop sensation Shaggy “It wasn’t me”. I did see that people had done that stuff, winced and then moved on.


I’m pretty sure Shaggy didn’t say

I did see that people had done that stuff, winced and then moved on.

Unless it’s a reprise released in his old age.



I asked a colleague at lunchtime to look at this but we were hampered as we
had not the original files. I hoped the originator might step in.

We could supply a coherent set if we have authority to replace files.

Btw - these days should we be using .svg files? But that maybe another can
of worms.

Also, is this all academic now the categories have been removed?

Let us know if we can help.




We have an issue for that:

I have been adding SVGs to the wiki for future use:


But for now use PNGs.

They haven’t been deleted, there are still there but just not visable, once suitable images have been added then they can be made public again :slight_smile: