This article was recently published in the Parsons Journal for Information Mapping, and it gives a nice visual overview of diferent type classification systems. I've yet to give it full attention, but this seemed interesting so I thought I'd share. Got the link from
@Henrique Nardi http://piim.newschool.edu/journal/issues/2013/01/pdfs/ParsonsJournalForInformationMapping_Childers_Griscti_Leben.pdf
Comments
As Frode shows, most systems don't place enough emphasis (or any at all) on what Indra Kupferschmid refers to as the “form model”, which is the main structure of type rather than its details. This is also a more robust and timeless approach than those that rely on historical (period-based) terminology.
Yes, Indra also refers to this in her writing in the topic.
So many type class systems, so little time!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/albert-jan_pool/9131677869/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/albert-jan_pool/albums/72157634319812838
https://www.flickr.com/photos/albert-jan_pool/albums/72157632114118830
I wonder about the term ‘Hybrid’ in the black letter nomenclature of the DIN classification. In the DIN Classification it says ‘Varianten’ and that should rather be translated as ‘Variants’, I think. Also please take a look at DIN. DIN normally stands for Deutsches Institut für Normung (not for Deutsche Industrie Normung). It seems that DIN has switched to the idea that DIN stands for DIN though. http://www.din.de/en The new website is designed using the ‘right’ typeface, of course ;–)
What kind of classification system do they use?