Alex, I know - the database that drives our site is surely humongous and 11 800 fonts will be hard to re-categorize. But I can't escape the feeling that DaFont (forgive me) is way better in terms of categorization. For example we have only 37 fonts in HEARTS category, but we're missing important RETRO category. ESOTERIC is another blurry category... Industrial is again not exactly clear. Tell me what (and you guys here) think about this....

I also want to ask : how would you categorize these so popular heavy counter-less typefaces:

http://www.abstractfonts.com/font/13275

I created most of these categories 10 years ago, when i was still a programmer kid who hasn't been around fonts too much.

Later there was a designer who suggested some of the categories, such as industrial, which i wasnt clear about but was convinced that it was needed.

I can always add/remove/rename categories, just like i recently renamed "Smooth" into less ambiguous "Rounded". If you have any suggestions i will always listen.

dafont's categories are flushed out more under a few headers making it easier to find a category but it has many annoying limitations which i tried to avoid on abstract fonts. For example on dafont, a font can only belong to one category, which is a HUGE downside in my opinion. Having font in multiple categories allows a visitor to find very specifically categorized fonts, such as only Sans fonts that also have Hearts.

Having this many fonts without this ability to recursively restrict categories will force you to go through all sans fonts and hope that they have some fonts that have hearts and then go through all hearts since some of the sans fonts could have gone under that category because they had hearts in it.

So what i am saying is Abstract Fonts has a better system but it may not be used to its full capacity. If you have ideas of how to rename some categories, delete others or create new please post here or email me. That goes for you kkat too, if you have an opinion.

The least I can suggest:
1. Retro
2. Display / Headline (although this could be rather unclear to most non-typo addicts)
3. Condensed (I know, most fonts that are Condensed have it written in their filename, but anyway)
4. "Normal" is okay, although it should be "Text"
5. DaFont has Cartoon AND Comic, which are quite good descriptions. We have Cartoon, but we don't have Comic

Any other suggestions are welcome. Alex?

PS. Also would like to see "Slab Serif" category, just in case :)

1. Retro is in.
2. "Display/Headline". Wouldn't that be "Normal + Sans"
3. Agree with "Condensed".
4. I think it would be more descriptive for someone to see "Normal" rather than "Text".
5. Do you think there is enough distinction between Comic and Cartoon to warrant separate categories? How would you describe in plain english each of those?
6. Slab? "Normal + Sans + Square"

My suggestions:
7) Add "People" for dingbats and other fonts that feature human shapes, faces, etc. Also, "Animals"
8) Merge Initial and Display under "Initial"
9) How do you feel about "Industrial"? Would you miss it?

Another thing i am considering is grouping the categories which will make them much easier to digest. It will clear up confusion with things like "Foreign" which is meant to be fonts that have foreign character sets and there is "Foreign look" which would contain "Greek" "Oriental" "Russian" "Old West". Any other "look" suggestions?

"Display/Headline" is more like opposite to Normal/Sans: this should be the category for typefaces that are suitable for Headlines, but they are not limited to Sans or Serif. Examples:

http://www.abstractfonts.com/font/13171
http://www.abstractfonts.com/font/13147

As for Comic and Cartoon: Cartoon could be anything that looks quirky, jumpy:

http://www.abstractfonts.com/font/13227

while Comic is strictly limited to text that looks like written with felt pen or something similar:

http://www.abstractfonts.com/font/13230

Not sure about Slab, as few people are familiar with the term - this is any Egyptienne like style.

http://www.abstractfonts.com/font/13147

Yes, agree about the Initial and Display Caps, but should be "Initials"

Industrial can go. As for Foreign look: yes, I agree - but Old West should stay as separate category :) But what about Hebrew and others that doesn't exactly fall into "Oriental"? Plus, I think they could be like dafont ones: Greek/Roman, Chinese/Japanese, etc...while the Indian and Hebrew would be in the top Foreign Look Category....

Hoping that this helps :)

Still thinking about this but want to jump in on the Initials/Display issue. If with display you mean, as Ivan says display caps, I am with you. You could then also add ornamental caps. As long as it is capitals. Display itself is something completely different.

yes, i mean combining display caps and initial caps under "initials"

you dont think "ornamental caps" fit nicely under "intials"?

can't wait to hear your suggestions. i will wait until you are ready to give feedback and we all agree.

My two cents, as for now.

· Yes, all the caps could easily go in the same category.
· The «Display» category is something completely different. I do not think it would be useful here, as most of the free fonts are for display/decorative use. Both serif and sans serif.
· Industrial is ok. Everything which can be associated with an industrial look or distressed as the wood typefaces, in my head, would fall in that category.

Thanks Sergio, all input is highly appreciated.

I will have to disagree about most fonts on here being decorative, especially since Ivan started uploading :). As you will see from the category stats below, there are over 900 "Normal" fonts, which are non-decorated, simple sans or serif that you could use for more or less serious stuff.

Below I will provide a table with categories and number of fonts in them sorted by number fonts. This will give you an idea which categories are overpopulated/underutilized so they can be renamed, split, added to, removed, etc...


+--------------+-----------+
| name | num_fonts |
+--------------+-----------+
| Normal | 907 |
| Italic | 697 |
| Handwriting | 694 |
| Futuristic | 671 |
| Sans | 667 |
| Decorative | 637 |
| Distorted | 504 |
| Serif | 418 |
| Outline | 377 |
| Fontbats | 338 |
| Dingbats | 318 |
| Cartoon | 294 |
| Script | 276 |
| Heavy | 257 |
| Weird | 238 |
| Grunge | 211 |
| Old English | 210 |
| Square | 201 |
| Famous | 183 |
| 3D | 182 |
| Pixel-Bitmap | 168 |
| Monospaced | 152 |
| LCD | 150 |
| Curly | 147 |
| Calligraphy | 144 |
| Minimalist | 144 |
| Horror | 141 |
| Medieval | 123 |
| Art Deco | 120 |
| Rounded | 112 |
| Brushed | 106 |
| Multi-lined | 105 |
| Industrial | 88 |
| Stencil | 88 |
| Spiky | 78 |
| Stars | 71 |
| Graffiti | 67 |
| Initial Caps | 66 |
| Fuzzy | 62 |
| Display Caps | 56 |
| Celtic | 56 |
| Flora | 50 |
| Foreign | 47 |
| Bloody | 45 |
| Oriental | 44 |
| Old West | 43 |
| Typewriter | 40 |
| Holidays | 39 |
| Hearts | 37 |
| Sliced | 36 |
| Russian | 34 |
| Sports | 33 |
| Ransom | 31 |
| Military | 28 |
| Greek | 24 |
| Circus | 22 |
| Esoteric | 10 |
| Adult | 7 |
+--------------+-----------+

My pleasure, Alex.

What I meant about the «Display» category is that, normally, I'd put there serif or sans clearly made for use in large sizes. With that in mind, if I was in charge of the database – with such a category – I'd definitely put there the Flora or the Multilined, the Graffiti or the Weird, while in normal times I'd put there just things like the Knockout or Champion typefaces as the Miller Display.
I do not think my English is good enough to carry on the conversation as I would do in Italian. I beg your pardon for this, as probably I'm not explaining well as I'd like to.

Thanks for clarifying the way you see the Display category. In mind it was only the clean fonts that qualified to be in headline/display. However, "Display" should definitely be a category, if all fonts meant to be displayed large belong there.

PS Your English is great. I'm an immigrant so i'm no language virtuoso either :)