I’d like to make some graphic changes to the OHM wiki.
My aim would be to make the information more easy to read and better connected so that you can find your way around.
Would you allow me to make these kinds of changes? It will always be possible to go back or make other changes to adapt mine.
It will concern all OHM wiki pages, first of all the main page OpenHistoricalMap - OpenStreetMap Wiki (list of OpenHistoricalMap wiki pages : All pages with prefix - OpenStreetMap Wiki)
What kind of changes do you have in mind? It’s a wiki, so if it’s a minor change, just go ahead and make it and we can refine it if there are any problems. For something more major, we can discuss the changes like with the previous redesign, to make sure people can still find what they need.
Speaking of the wiki, a lot of pages under the OpenHistoricalMap/ prefix need cleanup or deletion. There are pages that are nothing more than some one-off brainstorming notes but occupy important titles like “License” that the main OHM website links to. People keep finding these abandoned pages and getting confused. I’m not sure navigation or graphics will help; probably redirecting the page to something more complete would be better in these cases.
Hi @Koreller - welcome to OHM - do you have any examples of the types of changes you’d like to make?
It isn’t a proposal anymore if you go ahead an implement it. 
If you’re ever looking for feedback about a change before making it, feel free to create a subpage under your user page or a /sandbox subpage under the page you’re trying to change.
The changes look fine to me; I don’t have a strong opinion on whether there should be borders around every box or not. From your original post, it sounded like you had planned to make more wide-ranging changes to every page. Would those changes be purely stylistic, or did you have some reorganization in mind as well?
I like how you centered the OHM logo and wordmark, but we actually moved away from this wordmark a long time ago. The project’s name no longer has spaces in it, and we should probably just use plain text for accessibility reasons.
Incidentally, I noticed that you’re a native French speaker. Would you be interested in helping to port this redesign over to the French translation of the portal? We might need to make the templates more localizable, but I think it’s feasible.
I mean, it’s a wiki, it’s easy to revert my edit !
I don’t have a strong opinion on whether there should be borders around every box or not.
Yes me to also, I don’t really know, but I know that if we want to change it, it’s easy, we just need to edit the Template:Colored box
Would those changes be purely stylistic, or did you have some reorganization in mind as well?
My project was above all stylistic, because I haven’t made many changes to OHM I don’t know enough about it to make content changes to the documentation at the moment
OHM logo and wordmark
I change the file, so there are no more spaces. BTW where are the up-to-date OHM logo files (workmark alone, logo alone, both in the same image etc.)?
Good question. I haven’t come across much in the way of recent branding assets that include the wordmark. All I know is that openhistoricalmap.org features this SVG image of the OSM logo with an “H” inside the magnifying glass. It displays that logo with “OpenHistoricalMap” in the site’s default font, which is the system’s sans-serif font. If the page uses plain text instead of an image, it can similarly match the system font.
At some point, we should consider designing a more distinctive logo for OHM. The present logo is very similar to OSM’s, which is useful but also not as imaginative as it could be. Maybe we could start by discussing (in a separate thread) what we want out of a logo before putting out a call for proposals. Your design sense would be helpful for that effort.
Anyhow, the main thing left for this page redesign is to get rid of the spaces. @jeffmeyer has registered the “OpenHistoricalMap” trademark with the USPTO on behalf of this project, so it’s important to use it consistently. For all I know, it might also cover “Open Historical Map”, but I think that spelling is too close to the unrelated “Open History Map” project for comfort.
@Minh_Nguyen @jeffmeyer Perhaps my method is the wrong one,
Would it be better to agree on a graphic charter and visual and page composition elements before making graphic improvements?
And if we go in this way, what would be the methods for validating or not a choice?
Depends how ambitious you’d like to get with a visual refresh. The stakes are pretty low at this stage in the project. But an articulation of goals/principles/problems to solve would be helpful for setting direction. For example, the project logo currently has the problem of being too complex for use in certain contexts, yet too close to OSM’s logo to be memorable. The wiki portal’s main problem at the moment is that I can’t find the time to keep the “On this day in history” section updated. 
What about replacing the “H” with an hourglass. That way the logo is more pictographic so any hint of language preference is removed. It also gives for more space for reinterpretation without any loss of meaning. Allowing different project to reimagine the logo by so they can reflect the cultures and time periods they cover. Ancient projects could use a sundial while modern ones might substitute a watch face. Leading to a gallery of logos that match the flavor of the individual project. This would allow for a main logo image to be simplified while letting project logos get more exposure.
Let’s continue the conversation in a new thread, since the logo is only part of the wiki portal and would be used elsewhere, including OHM’s main site:
