Whats your Favorite font for text
-
Just curious what everyone likes best as the default font for text!
-
What is interesting is the with CSS3, the standard has the ability to add custom fonts and the browser will load those on the fly. So things will get really creative soon.
I like Palatino Linotype. But there are not many choices out there : )
-
For our site, default font for body copy = Arial and default font for headlines = Ed Gothic
Adding to what Barry said, another option for font replacement is cufon. With this tool you can leverage Javascript to allow you to use any font you own the rights to. From an SEO perspective the text is still on the page and crawlable by the bots.
To be fair, I'm not aware of any testing regarding SEO impact, but I don't see how it would be a problem. The text is still present in the markup so no crawling issues are created. Moreover, given that Google offers a similar service (as Barry pointed out), I can't come up with any reason why font replacement would cause any issues.
-
But as a serious answer we're using Droid Sans, Bold on a lot of our sites now using Googlefonts API - http://www.google.com/webfonts
If you're looking to do something that isn't quite standard we've managed to get Googlefonts working with next to no speed difference on the site (did take a bit of tweaking though, but nothing you wouldn't do if you were worried about page speed anyway, minify, caching, cdn, etc).
-
Comic Sans
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
How does ARIA-hidden text appear to search engines
I'm having trouble getting my accessibility team to add alt text to our site's images for SEO benefits as they feel some of it would add additional noise for screen readers. They proposed using ARIA-hidden attributes to hide the text but I'm wondering if will that be interpreted as a cloaking tactic to search engines? Also, I'm wondering if it the alt text will carry the same weight if ARIA-hidden is used. Has anyone had any experience with this? I'm having trouble finding any research on the topic.
Web Design | | KJ6001 -
Hidden Text w/ Java Script _ Is it Bad?
Just came across an article that stated that Google is looking negatively at sites that attempt to hide text or use javascripts to expand text on websites. We are about to launch our new website and believe we are using this technique but im not certain if what we are doing will hurt us. Our website tends to be a little heavy on the text so used a "read more" scrpit that will expand when clicked on. Three sections that use this on the new website Take a look and let me know your thoughts http://joomplateshop.com/demos/catdi.com/
Web Design | | ChopperCharlie0 -
Do Google Fonts Slow Down Your Site?
Hi Guys,
Web Design | | jeeyer
I just did a webpage speed test on http://www.webpagetest.org to see how our site is performing.
I noticed that an exteral URL called fonts.gstatic.com has a "huge" impact on our sites loading time. See a screen here: http://monosnap.com/image/z6drzC2ELoJ48d1rM0Tmtuszl3pFpH#
An overview can be seen here: http://monosnap.com/image/9hofUpr5Ld8D7mi7zyaJmGFIGhpBsY# All our scores are green and A (finally!) but I was a bit concerned when I saw the outcome of the pagespeedtest regarding the fonts.
When I load a page on my pc I indeed notice that the text content is usally quite slow in showing up, pops up afer a few seconds. Is this a know problem and Is this something I need to fix? If so what is the best approach? Looking forward on your thoughts!
Joost1 -
Google text-only vs rendered (index and ranking)
Hello, can someone please help answer a question about missing elements from Google's text-only cached version.
Web Design | | cpawsgo
When using JavaScript to display an element which is initially styled with display:none, does Google index (and most importantly properly rank) the elements contents? Using Google's "cache:" prefix followed by our pages url we can see the rendered cached page. The contents of the element in question are viewable and you can read the information inside. However, if you click the "Text-only version" link on the top-right of Google’s cached page, the element is missing and cannot be seen. The reason for this is because the element is initially styled with display:none and then JavaScript is used to display the text once some logic is applied. Doing a long-tail Google search for a few sentences from inside the element does find the page in the results, but I am not certain that is it being cached and ranked optimally... would updating the logic so that all the contents are not made visible by JavaScript improve our ranking or can we assume that since Google does return the page in its results that everything is proper? Thank you!0 -
Is it cloaking/hiding text if textual content is no longer accessible for mobile visitors on responsive webpages?
My company is implementing a responsive design for our website to better serve our mobile customers. However, when I reviewed the wireframes of the work our development company is doing, it became clear to me that, for many of our pages, large parts of the textual content on the page, and most of our sidebar links, would no longer be accessible to a visitor using a mobile device. The content will still be indexable, but hidden from users using media queries. There would be no access point for a user to view much of the content on the page that's making it rank. This is not my understanding of best practices around responsive design. My interpretation of Google's guidelines on responsive design is that all of the content is served to both users and search engines, but displayed in a more accessible way to a user depending on their mobile device. For example, Wikipedia pages have introductory content, but hide most of the detailed info in tabs. All of the information is still there and accessible to a user...but you don't have to scroll through as much to get to what you want. To me, what our development company is proposing fits the definition of cloaking and/or hiding text and links - we'd be making available different content to search engines than users, and it seems to me that there's considerable risk to their interpretation of responsive design. I'm wondering what other people in the Moz community think about this - and whether anyone out there has any experience to share about inaccessable content on responsive webpages, and the SEO impact of this. Thank you!
Web Design | | mmewdell0 -
What are your favorite articles graphically?
Hello, I'm trying to get some good ideas for graphically laying out very large articles, both of navigation as well as image use, illustrations, and video. What are your favorite long articles as far as looks go? I really like the seomoz beginner's guide, and pointblankseo has some pretty good layouts. This is for content for a client's ecommerce site. What are your favorites?
Web Design | | BobGW0 -
Replaceing text prices with graphics
Hello all: You probably noticed Google showing product prices in SERP snippets and this did not do us well because there was a noticable drop off in click throughs to the site with the price displaying in snippet. So we're replacing them with graphic prices instead. Does anyone see a problem with that in as far as how Google ranks our pages? Thanks!
Web Design | | holdtheonion0 -
Can google crawl text in jquery sliders?
We are redesigning our website and want to present a fair amount of text within jquery sliders. Will google crawl this text or is it treated the same way as actual script? Perhaps there is a way to just have the text as plain html but use jquery to display it?
Web Design | | Netboost0