Typeface classification today is shaped less by formal standards than by the practical needs of foundries, distributors, and digital platforms. While much discussion critiques the limitations of the Vox–ATypI system, less attention has been given to articulating what a future-oriented classification framework must actually address—particularly within a commercial ecosystem defined by searchability, tagging systems, and user navigation.
Workshop leaders:
- Ann Bessemans
- Sofie Beier
Voices from education:
- Milda Kuraitytė (Vilnius College of Design)
- Yves Peters (Artevelde University of Applied Sciences)
- Maurice Meilleur (Iowa State University)
- Thomas Phinney (Font detective, Type designer)
Voices from industry:
- Dave Crossland (Google Fonts)
- Gabbi Soong (arcoty.pe)
- Tom Rickner (Monotype)
- David Berlow (Font Bureau)
This panel examines how the industry currently categorizes typefaces: Are classifications primarily morphological, historical, functional, or market-driven? Would a shared standard across foundries improve clarity and interoperability, or would it restrict the flexibility required in a competitive marketplace?
The discussion also considers the feedback loop between industry and education but recognizes this might not be a simple 2-way relationship. Educational frameworks teach students to analyze typeface structure morphologically that develops and pushes their critical thinking into terminology and formal conceptual approaches. Industry platforms, meanwhile, optimize for user navigation and discovery, organizing typefaces by searchability, style names, and commercial categories. Yet, the terminology and conceptual structures taught in design schools shape how future designers search for and evaluate fonts as/for customers. Should industry classification mirror pedagogical frameworks, or should it evolve independently into parallel frameworks (creator- and user-focused)? And if misalignment exists, who ultimately adapts—the market or the classroom?
By addressing these questions, the panel aims to clarify whether greater coherence between teaching and commercial categorization is desirable—and what a future-facing industry framework should prioritize.
Resources
Ideally we can assume that all participants are familiar with these resources from ATypI: a resolution, a presentation and a panel discussion:
- ATypI de-adopts Vox-ATypI typeface classification system (ATypI News, April 27, 2021)
- Unvoxing the ATypI Classification Sesma, M. (2020), ATypI All Over 2020
- Thinking Outside the Vox Chahine, Dixon, Hudson, Kupferschmid, Sesma, Sherman, Afshar (2021)
Ann Bessemans
Sofie Beier