is a negative text-indent considered cloaking?

Question

I am using the negative-text-indent technique I learned to show a text-image to the user, while hiding the corresponding actual text.

This way the user sees the fancy styled text while search engines can still index it.

However I am started to think this sounds like cloaking since I am serving different content to the user vs the spider. However, I am not using this in a deceitful way. Plus it seems like this is a popular technique.

So is it SEO-safe or is it cloaking?

Thanks!

Jovitta

You're better off using the ALT tag for the actual text, both for SEO and usability. In some browsers the ALT text will take on the font properties of its container if the image is not available or turned off, so you can even make it look like it's supposed to be part of the page. – Snick

There is no such thing as an ALT tag. There is, however an ALT attribute. – Bigname

Answer 1

No, this is not cloaking. From what I can tell, you are not actually serving different content, based on whether (you think) the client is a crawler. The content you are serving is just interpreted differently by browsers than by a spider. If you are actually serving different content, why are you doing this?

I'd even go as far as say that it is good accessibility practice. Screen readers will still pick up on the hidden text, text browsers will show it normally, etcetera.

Overhasty

In terms of accessibility this is a bad move: With images off and CSS (a common setting for slow networks) on the reader sees nothing. – Dennie

@toscho, whenever I disable all images and css... I can see the text just fine. Don't have a screen reader to test on tho. – Jovitta

@toscho: Good point! However, is this technique any worse than other image replacement techniques in that respect? @John: the point was: images off, CSS on. – Overhasty

Ohh Ok, I understand now. And thanks, That is a good point I never considered. – Jovitta

@Overhasty I’m not sure if there are really robust replacement techniques. Another point is keyboard navigation: Most modern browsers allow their user to tab through all elements. From my own experience I know how annoying an invisible focus is … I don’t think, that this problem can be solved. If it really matters, I’d go with @font-face. This is always accessible and requires much less hacking. – Dennie

but coloring text as the background was considered cloacking... has this changed? in case not, which is the difference? – Singularity

Answer 2

No, this is not cloaking. I think the key phrase in Google's definition is:

If the file that Googlebot sees is not identical to the file that a typical user sees, then you're in a high-risk category.

You're not serving a different file - the content of the file served to GoogleBot is exactly the same as the content of the file served to users.

Hashimoto

Answer 3

Thomas is right - this is not cloaking. CResult's quoted text implies that Cloaking is serving a different files for crawlers and users. Meaning, for the context of crawling, Content = File. Thus, if you serve the exact same file, you are not Cloaking anything.

It doesn't matter if you serve off-screen text. It doesn't matter how the content is presented to the user. It doesn't matter what is inside the file.

Milomilon

Great thanks, now I have a better understanding on the definition of "cloaking" – Jovitta

Answer 4

At least one blog interprets one of google's help pages as proof that google would not approve of negative indents.

Also, this post which supposedly has a quote from a google employee on the topic.

Dissolution

Answer 5

This is NOT cloaking. I use image replacement techniques all the time. It makes sense in the fact it's more accessible. If the text reads what an image says then that's fine. It is functional to the image. If however, you're cloaking a description of the image that is not otherwise on the image anyway, I'd be concerned about that. It's fine to replace things that read the same. I do use ALT text, but sometimes I'd rather have the image as a background on text and indent it off screen. It meets the same requirements.

Chappelka