I feel a need to defend sIFR. It was actually very carefully designed in order to preserve standards, navigation, and accessibility. sIFR is designed to a) be

I feel a need to defend sIFR. It was actually very carefully designed in order to preserve standards, navigation, and accessibility. sIFR is designed to a) be frosting on top of a standards compliant HTML cake and b) fail very gracefully in every combination of javascript or flash availability. When you design using sIFR you are heavily encouraged to build the design with common web fonts first and then simply overlay the sIFR to be optionally rendered when possible. It even preserves behaviors like anchoring and copy/paste. The idea does, at first, sound extremely convoluted and toxic, but should be instead thought of as a really clever hack to make interesting typographic design possible despite constraints of font distribution online.