Newlogo

[1984logo]

I put the new TOML logos, marks and icons in this PR. Let me know if it works for you.

[eksortso]

We have been discussing these new logos for a long time. Can we get a blessing to make them a part of the TOML project? @pradyunsg @mojombo

[eksortso]

I think @1984logo you intended to say "config files for humans" with an "s"?
EDIT: Ignore this one. But look at the next one.

[eksortso]

This is just to correct a misspelling.

[septatrix]

Adding only the original vector files should be more than sufficient. Everyone should be able to convert it to the size they need and it prevents committing binary files to a repo (and also ensure there is a single source of truth).

[septatrix]

Also some of these icons like logos/monochrome/toml-mark-black-L.png seem to have an improper viewbox showing padding on some sides but not the others.

[1984logo]

@septatrix

Adding only the original vector files should be more than sufficient.

Having raster versions of the logo in the repository is a common practice. It helps the quick adoption of the logo in most use cases.

Also some of these icons like logos/monochrome/toml-mark-black-L.png seem to have an improper viewbox showing padding on some sides but not the others.

You're right. Thank you for noticing. Let me fix that.

[hugovk]

Some typos:

[arp242]

Overall I feel this looks rather nice, but I also find the uneven brackets a bit jarring at e.g. https://github.com/toml-lang/toml/blob/2412ba769caad047ea64ef885eb6f8d23ca4ad3a/README.md

The top is a bit shorter than the bottom, and there's a but of an indentation in the top-left and bottom-right one (to "fit" with the T and L).

It works quite nice on the small [T] icon/logo, but not so much on the [TOML] one. It just looks off?

I don't know if that's just me?