Talk:DIN (typeface)

Text and/or other creative content from this version of DIN (typeface) was copied or moved into DIN 1451 with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Confusing

I find this article title very confusing with DIN 1451 and FF DIN, not to mention other typefaces like DIN Neuzeit Grotesk/DIN 30460. What is the DIN typeface exactly? Shouldn't this article's content be merged with DIN 1451 and itself be a disambiguation page? --moyogo 21:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention DIN (typeface). Merge? // Liftarn (talk)

The article title DIN (typeface) is pretty useless (other than as a disambiguation page), as there are a number of different DIN standards that define typefaces, but these have nothing in common historically or stylistically , other than having been published by DIN. Articles that talk about particular national or international standards should always carry the number of the relevant standard in the canonical title, in this case DIN 1451. Markus Kuhn (talk) 19:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To add to the confusion, the "Nollendorfplatz" sample is actually Neuzeit Grotesk, not DIN 1451! Very confusing. 83.34.178.196 (talk) 06:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]