Most conversations about typography focus on aesthetics: which typeface is more beautiful, which weight feels more premium, which combination is "in" this year.
These are surface questions. The deeper question is: does your type system communicate the right hierarchy? Does it have consistent rhythm? Does it follow rules that can be applied predictably across the entire system?
Typography is architecture. Like architecture, its primary job is structural — to organize space and guide movement through it. Visual character is secondary.
The hierarchy question
Every type system needs to answer: what are the levels of information, and how are they visually differentiated?
A simple answer: three levels — display (headings), text (body), and UI (labels/buttons). Each level has a size, weight, and optionally a family. The system has rules for when to use each level.
A complex answer: eight levels, multiple families, contextual overrides, component-specific exceptions. This is how systems become inconsistent.
Start with three levels and add complexity only when three levels genuinely can't handle what you need to communicate.
Rhythm is invisible when it works
Leading, tracking, and measure aren't decorative decisions. They determine whether text is comfortable to read or not.
The right line length for body text is 50-75 characters. This isn't aesthetic preference — it's based on how eyes track across a line and reset. Violate it in either direction and reading becomes work.
Typography that follows these principles disappears. You stop noticing the type and start reading the content. That's the goal.