Gary › Likes

You meant "No Comic Sans." - EricaJoy

I agree with Bora; handwriting fonts aren't very well represented. There are a few at the bottom, but no Tekton, Zapf Chancery, or Comic Sans. - Gabe

Does it bother anyone else that there seems to be no apparent logic into how the typefaces were placed into the 'periodic table'? - Andrew C (✓)

What do you mean? All the typefaces in the first two columns save the last row are "Sans-serif Grotesque," followed by mixed serif/sans-serif, etc. I'm wondering how Garamond snuck its apparently identical twin sister "Garamond Classico" in there as a separate entry though. - Jim Norris

OK, fair enough, the first two columns have some logical grouping, minus that last row. I still don't see the rhyme or reason in the other columns. - Andrew C (✓)

Jim, I would expect mostly serif on one side and sans-serif on the other side, like how the periodic table of the elements has metals on one side and non-metals on the other side. - Gabe

If I were doing this chart, I would use PANOSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki...) classifications to arrange it. - Gabe

Also, there's an extra column on the right (wtf), the "atomic numbers" (rankings) aren't in order at all, the lanthanoids and actanoids are totally missing (except for the motley collection of handwriting fonts), and what's with those rounded corners? This is nothing like a chemical periodic table, it's just a bunch of fonts in boxes jammed into a very approximately periodic-table-shaped arrangement. - ⓞnor

I'm eagerly awaiting your fixed version now =) - Jim Norris

If I understand the description correctly, the table designer has averaged out several typeface rankings, then used the rank as the "atomic number", completely ignoring that real atomic numbers follow a pattern. - Andrew C (✓)

This is about the 5th time this has been shared - The Real sofarsoShawn

sofarsoshawn: It's actually been shared closer to 500 times than 5, but you only see a small fraction of them. - Gabe

But how many times has it been so eloquently criticized by Mr. ⓞnor? - Jim Norris