Does Using All-in-One Cufon Affect SEO?
The short answer is no, Cufon does not affect SEO or have any negative affect on SEO at all.
You can take a look at your page in a text-viewer http://www.delorie.com/web/lynxview.html/ to give you a sense of what’s visible to Google. You will notice how Cufon shows up just fine.
Cufon does not have any kind of direct impact on search engine rankings, even though you may possibly debate that the minimal rise in web page loading time on the website which includes the Cufon Javascript file may possibly have an effect on search positions but is unlikely. Here’s an excerpt from a study performed on Cufon by Chris Pangburn: http://www.aerodesigns.co.uk/blog/negative-seo-effects-of-cufon/
—————–
As a brief introduction for the non web-designers out there, Cufon is basically a way that we can use fancy fonts on the web without being restricted to the favoured few (eg: Arial, Times New Roman, Verdana etc..). For many years those stock fonts were the only choice we had and designers craved a way to ‘pretty up’ their sites and have the same freedom that print designers have.
He then goes on to say…
As in all three keyword variations the pages that utilised Cufon appeared above the non-Cufon pages, I think it is definitely safe to say that Cufon doesn’t actually have a negative impact on search rankings and SEO.
The fact that all of the pages that use Cufon appeared above the non-Cufon pages is probably a coincidence, perhaps because the Cufon version was always on a lower number folder – eg: /cfontest1.com and /cfontest2.com folders. It would be jumping to conclusions to say that Cufon aided search rankings! I think if this was to be taken further then extending the sample size to test say 20 different made-up keywords would be a good idea, as would having them on separate domain names, not just sub-folders as I did.
I hope this has dispelled some myths banded about by some SEO companies, and that SEO-minded web designers can be free again to use Cufon without worrying about the ranking consequences.
—————–
Seems like a pretty good test with reliable data. So Cufon is superior than sFIR IMO due to the fact it’s faster and simpler.
Then I came across this information on Cufo at http://viget.com/inspire/cufon-font-replacement-the-good-and-the-bad
—————–
… that it is possible to select Cufón text. Here’s the way Cufón works. The javascript file breaks up the html text you want to replace with Cufón by word and wraps each word in a span tag. It adds a class to the span that sets the height and width to “0″ so it appears as though the text is not visible but in reality is still there as far as the browser is concerned. The experience isn’t optimal but in IE(6-8), Safari 4, Chrome and FF3 you are still able to select the original HTML text. Although FF3 won’t show you the selected text but if you select it and hit ctrl+c you will be able to paste it.
When thinking about fonts on the web, what is the best case scenario for us? Probably the ability to embed any font directly into any browser using HTML/CSS, right? Cufón comes fairly close, but is still just a simpler hack. Cufón is certaintly not the final word on fonts on the web, but is — at this point — a little closer thanks to its simplicity and compactness.
—————–
Any comments you have on Cufon and what you have come across using this please let us know.
