Multi-criteria selection of methods for composing visual elements in the design of an electronic font catalog

During the creation of an electronic font catalog, design is viewed as an integrated system that combines functionality, aesthetics, and user interaction. The modern design approach focuses not merely on compiling a list of visual examples but on developing a tool that facilitates the effective selection of typographic solutions.

A key element of this process is an intuitive interface that reduces cognitive load. The visual hierarchy of information is based on minimalist principles, where the typeface serves as the central object, and the interface performs a supporting role.

The visual presentation of fonts plays a crucial role in the user experience. However, the analysis of existing catalogs demonstrates the need for dynamic visualization, allowing users to input their own text, evaluate the font in various sizes and styles, and test its readability. The architecture of each font block within the catalog is designed to be informative. Such solutions help users view typographic design in the context of its practical application.

Thus, the design of an electronic font catalog represents a complex system that integrates principles of efficiency, aesthetics, and informativeness, making it an im­portant subject of study in the fields of graphic and web design.

To determine the optimal design option for the font catalog, the multi-criteria de­cision-making (MCDM) method was applied. This approach is used to make decisions that depend on multiple, often conflicting, criteria. It helps to systematize a complex selection process, ensure transparency, and consider various aspects.

The research and problem-solving process included the following stages: defining the decision-making goal; identifying all possible alternatives; developing a catalog of evaluation criteria, which may include quantitative (e.g., price, time required to find a font) and qualitative factors (e.g., style, readability, navigation accessibility); determining the relative importance of each criterion, for example, through expert evaluation; analyzing each alternative according to the defined criteria; and summarizing the results.

Keywords: electronic catalog, design, font, alternative, criteria.

doi: 10.32403/0554-4866-2025-2-90-40-45