I'm interested in the reasoning behind taking the @ symbol rather than card or the 'lines of text' from the existing solutions. In the examples in the solution diagram all four represent a card, and 3 examples for a vCard icon have the lines, while only one has the @.
Had you already decided that the @ was important? In which case, what is that diagram trying to show? The final icon, while quite nice, doesn't represent "vCard" to me because it's too focused on email rather demonstrating what a vCard is - a representation of all of the things a user might have available.
Hi! I think that the most important concept behind a vCard should not be the card itself, but portraying a (virtual) personal identity. In this way, when we represent only the persona shape instead of the card we make strong emphasis on this.
Second, and I paraphrase from the blog post, "using a circular container has its constraints, and trying to adapt a rectangular design in a circle is something problematic, specially by correct use of the available space and margins". This also was a driver towards the current circular shape.
Last, the at(@) symbol is crucial for the link between communication and virtuality, and also to separate this to the classic "user" shape.
Replacing an avatars' face with an @ symbol feels like some violence has been done to a person — in other contexts, portraits are defaced by scribbling over the eyes or face, and that is what this icon feels like.
Additionally, the @ symbol usually means email, and I'd expect to end up in a mail compose window after clicking an icon with such a prominent '@'.
I think that the @ symbol as a face replacement is not the best aesthetic decision to make. Using a larger person icon like the one used on Mac OS X user accounts icon in the System Preferences is better. Mac OS X uses two people's busts to signify plurality but a single person is better suited here. After that place the white @ symbol on the users chest right below a T-shirt's neckline. This way the significance of it being a personal item is not lost in translation while the @ symbol advertises the purpose of the icon. A person's icon that doesn't show arms is also easier to manifest in a 16x16 pixel icon. Furthermore it would be better to use a gender neutral head outline.
I kinda like the original solutions better. The card with picture on one side, lines of text on the other, and rolodex-holes at the bottom. I've seen about 50 different styles of this icon, and while it should probably be standardized a bit, I think people understand it. And a vector based design would easily fit into the same arbitrary bubble they chosed. No reason to reinvent something that's taken on its own aesthetic over the past decade. But good job trying to challenge status quo.
7 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 31.2 ms ] threadHad you already decided that the @ was important? In which case, what is that diagram trying to show? The final icon, while quite nice, doesn't represent "vCard" to me because it's too focused on email rather demonstrating what a vCard is - a representation of all of the things a user might have available.
Second, and I paraphrase from the blog post, "using a circular container has its constraints, and trying to adapt a rectangular design in a circle is something problematic, specially by correct use of the available space and margins". This also was a driver towards the current circular shape.
Last, the at(@) symbol is crucial for the link between communication and virtuality, and also to separate this to the classic "user" shape.
I could live with that sign but I bet most casual users won't get the @=>vcard=>business card reference.
All things considered, good proposal.