Re: Repositioning Google Logo, Terms of Use and Copyrights

On Jan 7, 6:10 pm, Shaunny <shaunpowel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andrew and thank you for your help.
>
> It wasn't difficult to move the Google Logo, as it has a css class
> associated to it.
>
> #logocontrol{
> LEFT: 0px !important;
> BOTTOM: -35px !important;
> }

Aha. So Google produce invalid HTML when more than one map is on the
page. That's Issue 1312 which will need to be reopened.
http://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/issues/detail?id=1312 (It's
an id, not a class; and CSS shouldn't have upper-case like that, but
never mind)

> The notices and terms I padded down using javascript on page
> initialisation, so in simple effects, I am just moving it and keeping
> it all tidy.

I think you are altering the notice as provided by the Service (Term
7.4(d)). Even if that's not the case, you are certainly in breach of
Term 9.3(a) because you are not displaying the link as presented
through the Service.

I agree that allowing the copyright string to break would be better
than it overflowing; and I agree that positioning it outside the map
would also be better than it overflowing; and I agree that Google
themselves have in the past suggested overflow:hidden. But you asked
about the rules.

Bear in mind too that it wouldn't take much to break your
implementation. The logo should not have an id, and the Terms link can
be moved within the DOM at will (with every release, if necessary).

> Though I appreciate your suggestion, the boss wishes to have the map
> container a specific size as to keep the page proportional with the
> other components on page.

Tell your boss it's against the rules. You can either have the fixed
text obscure what you want to display in the map, or you can resize
the map so that everything displays. What you could do, of course, is
alter other things to match the size the map has to be. Or: get your
boss to instruct you to break the rules. Then it's not on your head.

Andrew