From Typographer to Graphic Designer: Typographic Exhibitions and the Formation of a Graphic Design Profession in Canada in the 1950s and 1960s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article explore le développement d’une communauté professionnelle de design au Canada pendant les années 1950 et 1960 en examinant deux collaborations entre graphistes : les expositions canadiennes Typography (1958–1964) et l’exposition internationale Typomundus 20 (1963–1966). Celles-ci contribuèrent à la publicisation d’un nouveau discours qui permit aux typographes et aux concepteurs de la communication canadiens de se penser comme faisant partie d’une communauté unifiée et distincte de « graphistes ». Elles encouragèrent cette cohésion professionnelle notamment en avançant des normes professionnelles, en lançant une réflexion sur le statut et le rôle du graphisme par rapport au « grand » art, à la communication de masse et à la société en général, et en facilitant l’échange d’idées entre les professionnels canadiens et la communauté internationale de graphistes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".