The typefaces described on this site should be regarded as early experiments in finding a working method for creating digital type. Idiosyncrasies in the letterforms -- even "annoying" ones -- have not been rectified. At most, "natural selection" has been made from two or three alternative drawings of some letters.

Typefaces in development or planned include handwritten faces which exploit the advanced typographic abilities of QuickDraw GX, including many ligatures.

I am struggling with the premise that only type which refers to manual creation -- writing and carving -- has any aesthetic value or relevance. While this does not mean that I can only accept (or create) handwritten faces, it has made me somewhat uncertain of working methods for creating type. I tend to conclude that penmanship is the fundamental determinant of one's usefulness as a type designer. If your opinion differs or you wish to otherwise contribute to this (usually internal) debate, please write!

In support of this thesis, let me quote:

When the connection of type design with handwriting was given up designers were cut off from inspiration.
. . .
Roman type has its origin in Burgundian handwriting.

Gerrit Noordzij in letterletter 11.

Perhaps it is not too fanciful to suggest that there is something about the original link between handwriting and type which has brought out the best in type designers. The scripts in display type, many of the best examples coming from traditional foundries, offer a rich variety of skilful examples of type design . . .

baseline 16.

As confidence builds, I expect to progress from scanning handwritten artwork to more formal methods of design. The next face (Cursive) will still use handwriting as the basis but will be manually traced. Some tuning of letterforms will then be possible.