Typefaces Classifications

The Development of Typeface Classification Systems Through the Eras of Analogue and Digital Typography.
During the last century, numerous approaches to define and implement systems to classify type were developed and published. This work is focused on typeface classification systems; their evolution, authors, target groups, internal logic and structure, the technical environments they are published into, their potential to differentiate historical and contemporary typefaces as well as the problems the respective system attempt to address. The work retraces the historical development of classification systems from person-centred narratives of the early 20th century to internationally recognised norms of the mid-century and their evolution into digital typeface identification and browsing systems in the new millennium. It shows their development from schemata of mental representation, conceptual typeface-field-guides into interactive navigation systems through the ever growing world of fonts. The work identifies different classificatory aspects as basic motivations behind the classification systems and analyses the underlying logical structures of the approaches and the structural development through time. A key finding is the analysis and results of contrasting modes of class definition as one main reason for the ongoing differentiation of classification systems and the identification of  the »mode of addressing« typefaces as a key difference between prototypically and formal-logically defined systems. Although there seems to be no consensus on how, or if, typefaces could be classified at all, as the mere number of systems suggests, there is a consensus in the way how type is being differentiated, the attributes of classification. They remain, another key finding of the work, relatively stable through many decades. The research ends with a summary of premises for future, digital systems and suggests what their future roles in typography and design could be.

La uniformización del pensamiento de cualquier tipo, ya sea político o tipográfico, supone una imposición ideológica cuyo fin básico es el de desautorizar la disparidad. La simple aceptación de un sistema de clasificación como el tipográfico de Vox-ATypI es por tanto admitir de facto el sometimiento a una posición cultural determinada que, fundamentalmente, descarta cualquier otra clasificación posible que no esté sometida a sus criterios. En este caso, todos los modelos tipográficos que no se correspondan con el sistema alfabético latino han pasado en el mejor de los casos a formar parte del grupo marginal, a modo de cajón de sastre, de los tipos «no latinos». El propósito original de Maximilien Vox era además el de «unificar los signos lingüísticos» con el fin de crear una herramienta de comunicación tipográfica exclusiva —en todos los sentidos—, basada únicamente en el alfabeto latino, anulando así cualquier diferencia cultural. Este hecho revela de esta manera una posición de poder hegemónico occidentalocéntrico con respecto al amplísimo abanico mundial de escrituras, que la Association Typographique Internationale (ATypI) sigue sin corregir a fecha de hoy en lo que a clasificaciones tipográficas se refiere, a pesar de que los teóricos postcoloniales y de la multiculturalidad ya hace décadas que han revelado un panorama sociocultural que reclama dichos cambios. En el contexto social actual de la aldea global en la que vivimos, la tipografía debe servir como elemento de integración cultural y la redefinición de los sistemas clasificatorios es uno de esos mecanismos.

Palabras clave: typefaces classification, Vox-ATypI, postcolonial theories, multiculturalism

The Development of Typeface Classification Systems Through the Eras of Analogue and Digital Typography. During the last century, numerous approaches to define and implement systems to classify type were developed and published. This work is focused on typeface classification systems; their evolution, authors, target groups, internal logic and structure, the technical environments they are published into, their potential to differentiate historical and contemporary typefaces as well as the problems the respective system attempt to address. The work retraces the historical development of classification systems from person-centred narratives of the early 20th century to internationally recognised norms of the mid-century and their evolution into digital typeface identification and browsing systems in the new millennium. It shows their development from schemata of mental representation, conceptual typeface-field-guides into interactive navigation systems through the ever growing world of fonts. The work identifies different classificatory aspects as basic motivations behind the classification systems and analyses the underlying logical structures of the approaches and the structural development through time. A key finding is the analysis and results of contrasting modes of class definition as one main reason for the ongoing differentiation of classification systems and the identification of the »mode of addressing« typefaces as a key difference between prototypically and formal-logically defined systems. Although there seems to be no consensus on how, or if, typefaces could be classified at all, as the mere number of systems suggests, there is a consensus in the way how type is being differentiated, the attributes of classification. They remain, another key finding of the work, relatively stable through many decades. The research ends with a summary of premises for future, digital systems and suggests what their future roles in typography and design could be.