I am fascinated by typography and page design and enjoy reading about it, but I have to admit I don't understand how this level of pedantry is able to survive.
The amount of documentation and attention to detail spent on typefaces and when to use them is often off the charts compared to the time spent on stuff like keeping the website running, documenting the API or even the basic functionality of the app.
It's like if someone grows oak trees for a century and slices veneer from it with a handcrafted blade and soaks it in coconut oil for a year before slapping it on a IKEA pulp honeycomb. :)
Typographic documentation is for designers generally, but there is a world where this can actually help everyone. Designers should make consistent designs. By doing this Developers can create functional designs systems that have sane default behaviors. Once you can get to that point, the system serves to reduce the load from the dev, not increase.
I have created a tailwind-based design system interpretation like this in the education space at a rather large scale. Our designs and our tailwind-config comes from the same spec.
Doing this removes the engineer from thought by reducing options and possibilities. It also serves as check and balance. Paddings, font-weights, all of it are consistent. Designs that deviate from line-height, padding, weights, colors, etc are incorrect mocks and our configured values will make it obvious to the dev. Code that deviates from the spec is incorrect. This requires a good communication flow between Eng and UX but actually works in practice.
In a functioning system, it is a weight off your shoulders as you end up knowing the defaults just by looking at something.
Might I also remind you, the point of the entire backend of an app is to serve the front end. An app with amazing backend practices but fails at matching designs or specs is just a failure and is noticeable by customers.
It is generally different roles of people working on design guides like this versus working on documenting an API or other "basic functionality". It's not necessarily a zero sum effort (and probably often is entirely not) to produce design guides and work on other technical requirements at the same time.
Also, design, including and sometimes especially typography, is accessibility and is often worth that sort of attention to detail for exactly that reason, keeping designs accessible to all users. Defining contrasts and visual hierarchy hugely influences how accessible something using a design might be.
One specific example I see is the callout in this particular example for using much less UPPERCASE text moving forward from whatever their previous design language was. This is something I know that I've fought designers I've worked with over as an accessibility problem they've missed. (It's also something that Microsoft went through a huge accidental blow up in very public with early "Metro" designs that they had to apologize for and then walk back in consequent "Fluent" designs.) In general people read word shapes more than individual letters, uppercase forms a lot of very similar looking "rectangles" and even for readers with no other obvious dyslexia uppercase words are the visual equivalent of "speed bumps" in a roadway. They slow reading, sometimes to a crawl, and generally just get in the way, for all readers. (For dyslexic readers I've known they sometimes are even more "walls" than simply "speed bumps" and text entirely in uppercase will completely upset them, if not make the content 100% inaccessible to them and they will nope out entirely.)
That's an important thing about typography that is easy to miss. I've seen so many designs use all uppercase text in places simply because it "looks nice" (those "all words create about the same sort of rectangular shape" that makes a dyslexic viewpoint absolutely hate seeing all uppercase text add a regularity and "cleanliness" to design shapes that some designers find they love; one person's massive accessibility bug is another's aesthetic feature).
This type of guideline can be extremely helpful in a number of ways. People at various levels and with various levels of training tend to love to be creative at the expense of huge brand campaigns, so the branding design team has to find ways to reign in those passions. Technical access is generally much more limited for such people than is access to de facto brand representation through graphical presentation.
If it's a differential comparison vs. tech then that differential should be treated as its own issue, not an issue of design guidelines deserving a label like pedantry just because something else isn't as well-planned or documented.
Well, this is is not guidelines for an app or a website. This is guidelines for how the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation, the Ministry of Culture, the Swedish Institute, Business Sweden and Visit Sweden and the different agencies they use, should use typography when representing Sweden abroad.
I don't think the type section is unusually large, but I worked at a company for two years that exclusively made design manuals, and the well made ones tend to look like this.
>> I am fascinated by typography and page design and enjoy reading about it
You should check out the Netflix series:
Abstract: The Art of Design
Episode: Jonathan Hoefler: Typeface Design
The guy has some of the most important typefaces. The episode does an amazing job detailing his career and how they develop new typefaces. His work is literally everywhere and its super fascinating some of the misconceptions about type.
From the website running and dev side, I'd argue time spent on typography and page design guidelines have super high ROI.
First, it's basically one shot: once you have a type face and yhe guideline, only small tweaks are needed down the line. Changing it willy nilly has too much impact that it's just not an option either way. So you better spend time having it right.
Then it will be referred to in millions of places. Every single site made by the Swedish government will have to look at this guideline and decide where to use Sweden sans and when to use Noto. For their own project it wil be a small decision, but in aggregate the better the guideline is the lesser time needs to be spent bikeshedding on which font to use and if Times New Roman is acceptable.
The amount of documentation and attention to detail spent on code layout and API design (example: whether array sizes should be signed to unsigned integers, whether to use (start, length) or (start, end) to specify ranges) is often off the charts, too, and those are things the users will never see.
As in those cases, the investment in these kinds of guidelines should be worth it because less time gets spent on such discussions later and consistency of products is improved.
The # & and @ are horrible. The A and the G are strange, two characters with a grace in a sans font. But i and j have that too. However I is designed to look different from l, which is not the case in many fonts.
It really doesn't matter how much attention you spend on typeface and design if the way you greet visitors is with an obnoxious "are you sure you don't want our tracking cookies?" where I have to click two tiny checkboxes, followed by a user-hostile trick bold "accept all" button next to the faded "accepted selected" option.
If you really wanted to improve UX, one of those things is more worthy of attention.
I think this is just for some site focussed at promoting Sweden's image to foreigners? I don't think I've ever seen this font in use in normal communications from the Swedish state, living here in Sweden.
I like the Swedish Tax Agency's design language, if it can be called that. I don't think they use this Sweden Sans, but I'm not sure what they do use.
> I think this is just for some site focussed at promoting Sweden's image to foreigners?
It’s run by the Swedish Institute.
> The Swedish Institute is a public agency that builds interest and trust in Sweden around the world. We work with Sweden promotion, cooperation in the Baltic Sea region and global development. […] SI’s operations are financed mainly through appropriations directly through the state budget. SI has approximately 470 million Swedish government funds in four areas: international cooperation, international assistance, education and university research and business.[1]
It's definitely interesting how countries have their own PR these days.
And it's working, if you think of a nordic country, chances are, Sweden is the first one that comes to mind.
Someone on Sweden was saying the Police have to catch you on the day to prove you are the driver, but I think I will stick to the German autobahns, less moose on the loose.
It's called Sweden Sans, but it appears to have serifs on at least some of the letters like lowercase i and l. Am I misunderstanding what a serif is? Or am I understanding what sans means in this context?
I’m surprised that a country would choose/create a typeface with only four weights and no italics for their design system. I’d understand if it was primarily a display font, but it seems intended for body copy as well.
It may be well designed etc etc etc...but I actually found it a bit hard to read. Maybe the letter spacing is too wide? So it's fractionally too hard to distinguish spaces from intra-word spacing.
Also...look under "Type usage" - they are using an image of a table instead of a table? Good lord.
I love looking at new fonts but from the perspective of book readability, this one I feel has the letter spacing too close together, and possibly also too narrow letters.
I am Swedish and I've never heard of the Sweden Sans font before. The font doesn't look very "Swedish" to me and is completely different from the font used on road signage, for example. For running text the font doesn't work at all imo.
I appreciate when governments make an effort to build proper style guidelines for their national brand.
I think the UK has done a great job with their government website and their digital platforms. So it's good to see more governments getting into it as well.
This is an old thread, but I'm a little puzzled by developers wondering why the tools we use should not be well-specified. I work on backend systems that rely heavily on high-specialized RFCs for DNS and domain name registrars. If they weren't painstakingly detailed, we'd be toast. But a new executive (no longer with us) once told us to simplify our representation of top-level domains because she thought it was too complicated, as though we could ignore the RFCs.
Are we playing with an idea that has similar dangers here? Ask the opposite question: what would happen if typeface designers didn't go to all this detail? Would we just want to know that "Arial is the round-ish one and Times New Roman has little footsy things?"
Font selection is a big deal to brand identity and marketing. They like to have lots of choices. We even design our own fonts sometimes. How many developers have, as I have, changed fonts in our code editors, looking for the one that's "just right?"
For whatever reasons, the demand for distinct fonts is high, and if there are lots of fonts, they need to be completely specified, so that they can be created and rendered correctly.
> The name comes from the fact that calligraphy-inspired typefaces were first designed in Italy, to replace documents traditionally written in a handwriting style called chancery hand. Aldus Manutius and Ludovico Arrighi (both between the 15th and 16th centuries) were the main type designers involved in this process at the time.
> The first use in a complete volume was a 1501 edition of Virgil dedicated to Italy [...]
> Italic type rapidly became very popular and was widely (and inaccurately) imitated. The Venetian Senate gave Aldus exclusive right to its use, a patent confirmed by three successive Popes, but it was widely counterfeited as early as 1502
[+] [-] Kon5ole|2 years ago|reply
The amount of documentation and attention to detail spent on typefaces and when to use them is often off the charts compared to the time spent on stuff like keeping the website running, documenting the API or even the basic functionality of the app.
It's like if someone grows oak trees for a century and slices veneer from it with a handcrafted blade and soaks it in coconut oil for a year before slapping it on a IKEA pulp honeycomb. :)
[+] [-] agloe_dreams|2 years ago|reply
I have created a tailwind-based design system interpretation like this in the education space at a rather large scale. Our designs and our tailwind-config comes from the same spec.
Doing this removes the engineer from thought by reducing options and possibilities. It also serves as check and balance. Paddings, font-weights, all of it are consistent. Designs that deviate from line-height, padding, weights, colors, etc are incorrect mocks and our configured values will make it obvious to the dev. Code that deviates from the spec is incorrect. This requires a good communication flow between Eng and UX but actually works in practice.
In a functioning system, it is a weight off your shoulders as you end up knowing the defaults just by looking at something.
Might I also remind you, the point of the entire backend of an app is to serve the front end. An app with amazing backend practices but fails at matching designs or specs is just a failure and is noticeable by customers.
[+] [-] WorldMaker|2 years ago|reply
Also, design, including and sometimes especially typography, is accessibility and is often worth that sort of attention to detail for exactly that reason, keeping designs accessible to all users. Defining contrasts and visual hierarchy hugely influences how accessible something using a design might be.
One specific example I see is the callout in this particular example for using much less UPPERCASE text moving forward from whatever their previous design language was. This is something I know that I've fought designers I've worked with over as an accessibility problem they've missed. (It's also something that Microsoft went through a huge accidental blow up in very public with early "Metro" designs that they had to apologize for and then walk back in consequent "Fluent" designs.) In general people read word shapes more than individual letters, uppercase forms a lot of very similar looking "rectangles" and even for readers with no other obvious dyslexia uppercase words are the visual equivalent of "speed bumps" in a roadway. They slow reading, sometimes to a crawl, and generally just get in the way, for all readers. (For dyslexic readers I've known they sometimes are even more "walls" than simply "speed bumps" and text entirely in uppercase will completely upset them, if not make the content 100% inaccessible to them and they will nope out entirely.)
That's an important thing about typography that is easy to miss. I've seen so many designs use all uppercase text in places simply because it "looks nice" (those "all words create about the same sort of rectangular shape" that makes a dyslexic viewpoint absolutely hate seeing all uppercase text add a regularity and "cleanliness" to design shapes that some designers find they love; one person's massive accessibility bug is another's aesthetic feature).
[+] [-] mlsu|2 years ago|reply
I think it's pretty simple:
- there are a lot of people out there who love obsessing over typography
- they want to obsess over typography
- so they invent a purpose for obsessing over typography
I love it, I'm here for it, and I think we should give people money for obsessing over typography.
[+] [-] themodelplumber|2 years ago|reply
If it's a differential comparison vs. tech then that differential should be treated as its own issue, not an issue of design guidelines deserving a label like pedantry just because something else isn't as well-planned or documented.
[+] [-] mediascreen|2 years ago|reply
I don't think the type section is unusually large, but I worked at a company for two years that exclusively made design manuals, and the well made ones tend to look like this.
[+] [-] at-fates-hands|2 years ago|reply
You should check out the Netflix series:
Abstract: The Art of Design Episode: Jonathan Hoefler: Typeface Design
The guy has some of the most important typefaces. The episode does an amazing job detailing his career and how they develop new typefaces. His work is literally everywhere and its super fascinating some of the misconceptions about type.
[+] [-] makeitdouble|2 years ago|reply
First, it's basically one shot: once you have a type face and yhe guideline, only small tweaks are needed down the line. Changing it willy nilly has too much impact that it's just not an option either way. So you better spend time having it right.
Then it will be referred to in millions of places. Every single site made by the Swedish government will have to look at this guideline and decide where to use Sweden sans and when to use Noto. For their own project it wil be a small decision, but in aggregate the better the guideline is the lesser time needs to be spent bikeshedding on which font to use and if Times New Roman is acceptable.
[+] [-] Someone|2 years ago|reply
As in those cases, the investment in these kinds of guidelines should be worth it because less time gets spent on such discussions later and consistency of products is improved.
[+] [-] makstaks|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jw1224|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hoosieree|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wildpeaks|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] astrolx|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] acjohnson55|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smlacy|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pmontra|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] remram|2 years ago|reply
If you really wanted to improve UX, one of those things is more worthy of attention.
[+] [-] asdfv09s9d80fu9|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shmoe|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] EastLondonCoder|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jamesblonde|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fprog|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] presbyterian|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] elromulous|2 years ago|reply
I think we hugged it to death.
[+] [-] TazeTSchnitzel|2 years ago|reply
I like the Swedish Tax Agency's design language, if it can be called that. I don't think they use this Sweden Sans, but I'm not sure what they do use.
[+] [-] mikae1|2 years ago|reply
It’s run by the Swedish Institute.
> The Swedish Institute is a public agency that builds interest and trust in Sweden around the world. We work with Sweden promotion, cooperation in the Baltic Sea region and global development. […] SI’s operations are financed mainly through appropriations directly through the state budget. SI has approximately 470 million Swedish government funds in four areas: international cooperation, international assistance, education and university research and business.[1]
[1] https://si.se/en/about-si/our-mission/
[+] [-] sakjur|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ricardobayes|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] darkclouds|2 years ago|reply
I did think that myself, certainly a bit of space and countryside to enjoy and getting around Sweden doesnt take long if you have a motorbike...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXiIJ32kaZU
Someone on Sweden was saying the Police have to catch you on the day to prove you are the driver, but I think I will stick to the German autobahns, less moose on the loose.
ghost rider patrik fürstenhoff
[+] [-] RandallBrown|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] etiennemarcel|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nicbou|2 years ago|reply
https://wir.berlin/kampagnen/die-typo
[+] [-] The_Double|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pbowyer|2 years ago|reply
https://fonts.tourismni.com/
Their website is a nightmare to find content on, so here's the design guidelines: https://www.visiteuropewithskal.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/0...
[+] [-] askonomm|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] CharlesW|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stevage|2 years ago|reply
Also...look under "Type usage" - they are using an image of a table instead of a table? Good lord.
[+] [-] Sunspark|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bjourne|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] omoikane|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jerojero|2 years ago|reply
I think the UK has done a great job with their government website and their digital platforms. So it's good to see more governments getting into it as well.
[+] [-] rav|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] s-xyz|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _sky-captain_|2 years ago|reply
Are we playing with an idea that has similar dangers here? Ask the opposite question: what would happen if typeface designers didn't go to all this detail? Would we just want to know that "Arial is the round-ish one and Times New Roman has little footsy things?"
Font selection is a big deal to brand identity and marketing. They like to have lots of choices. We even design our own fonts sometimes. How many developers have, as I have, changed fonts in our code editors, looking for the one that's "just right?"
For whatever reasons, the demand for distinct fonts is high, and if there are lots of fonts, they need to be completely specified, so that they can be created and rendered correctly.
[+] [-] DaveFlater|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Telemakhos|2 years ago|reply
Sadly, it's Calibri. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/19/us/politics/state-departm...
[+] [-] pmontra|2 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_type
> The name comes from the fact that calligraphy-inspired typefaces were first designed in Italy, to replace documents traditionally written in a handwriting style called chancery hand. Aldus Manutius and Ludovico Arrighi (both between the 15th and 16th centuries) were the main type designers involved in this process at the time.
> The first use in a complete volume was a 1501 edition of Virgil dedicated to Italy [...]
> Italic type rapidly became very popular and was widely (and inaccurately) imitated. The Venetian Senate gave Aldus exclusive right to its use, a patent confirmed by three successive Popes, but it was widely counterfeited as early as 1502
[+] [-] runlaszlorun|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] blowski|2 years ago|reply