Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > Question about frames

Reply
Thread Tools

Question about frames

 
 
rf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
Barbara de Zoete wrote:

[frames argument]

You are new here, are you not? At least I have not seen your handle until a
few days ago, when we had our brief, er, discussion about advice for free


You will find that the regulars here have a zero tolerance policy against
frames. Everything you say that you might think is good about frames can and
will be countered with the appropriate negative. That usually includes the
damned iframe element.

FWIW a brief history of frames (if you are not aware):

Frames were invented by Netcape sometime in the last century. Netscape
announced their invention with fanfare and with a brand new web site using
these "wonderfull new frames". A totally new site, they produced, redesigned
from the ground up with frames.

About six months later Netscape totally redesigned their web site yet again.
This time they Did Not Use Frames. They saw the enormous problems that
frames created and abandoned the concept. Netscape have never used frames on
their site again.

If the inventor of the dreaded frame abandonded it after only six monthes
(and that was six or ten years ago) then why would anybody these days use
frames? Dare I use the word "draconian"

--
Cheers
Richard.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Barbara de Zoete
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:45:14 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:

> Barbara de Zoete wrote:
>
> [frames argument]
>
> You are new here, are you not? At least I have not seen your handle
> until a
> few days ago, when we had our brief, er, discussion about advice for free
>
>


Well, new as in active, yes. But I've lurked here for about a year and a
half (as in some of the ciwa* groups and in ahc); how do you think I
learned all I use for my site?

> You will find that the regulars here have a zero tolerance policy against
> frames.


That is not really a good reason to skip the subject all together, is it?

> Everything you say that you might think is good about frames can and
> will be countered with the appropriate negative.


So I have noticed.

> That usually includes the damned iframe element.

^^^^^^

I guess you're with the 'frames are evil' croud then?

> FWIW a brief history of frames (if you are not aware):
>


I am aware of its history, but thanks for reminding me.

This group is not about the www. It is about HTML. HTML gets used in a
wide range of situations. I've seen office applications, html-based, that
couldn't have been developed without frames. Good applications, well
designed in all aspects I could think of, userfriendly, to be used only in
a very specific and enclosed environment by trained people. I think there
are situations where utilisation of frames is not only a legit thing to
do, it is the best option to choose

<em>This does exclude any publication for the <strong><abbr
title="*World*Wide*Web*">www</abbr></strong> however.</em>

But that is just an opinion and has a value equal to other argumented
opinions.


--
Weblog | <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html>
Webontwerp | <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html>
Zweefvliegen | <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
rf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
Barbara de Zoete wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:45:14 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:


> > You are new here, are you not? At least I have not seen your handle
> > until a
> > few days ago, when we had our brief, er, discussion about advice for

free
> >
> >

>
> Well, new as in active, yes. But I've lurked here for about a year and a
> half (as in some of the ciwa* groups and in ahc); how do you think I
> learned all I use for my site?


How could you possibly lurk here for that long and not resist chirping in?
Bizarre

> > You will find that the regulars here have a zero tolerance policy

against
> > frames.


> That is not really a good reason to skip the subject all together, is it?


Er, no. Er, yes. Er, what? Skip the subject? We are not skipping it. I am at
least vehemenantly arguing against it.

> > Everything you say that you might think is good about frames can and
> > will be countered with the appropriate negative.


> So I have noticed.
>
> > That usually includes the damned iframe element.

> ^^^^^^
>
> I guess you're with the 'frames are evil' croud then?


Absolutely. Bloody bastards they are. Hate em. Same with the iframe
substitute of a vertically sized div with a scroll bar. Have you ever tried
to scroll such a page with your mouse wheel? Bloody annoying to say the
least

If you have been lurking here then you surely know my stance on this. I
state it often enough.

What is wrong with a simple page that I can scroll my viewport up and down
upon. Why do authors insist on all sorts of Kewl things that *they* think
might be good for themselves, never thinking about how bloody hard they make
it for *me*, the viewer. Authors don't *use* a site. They write it. They
look at *bits* of it, to find the spelling errors. They never try to *use*
it because they know what is in it. They never try to read it from beginning
to end. I know, I fell into a similar trap once. I now stand back and read
word for word, aloud, every page I produce, as if I were a first time
viewer. This is alpha testing. Find the mistakes before it goes to beta or,
worse, to production.

> > FWIW a brief history of frames (if you are not aware):


> I am aware of its history, but thanks for reminding me.


Just making sure. It pays to recount that history occasionally for the
newbies.
>
> This group is not about the www.


Ah, yes, it is. There is an FAQ somewhere that says it is. All of the usenet
groups that have HTML or whatever in their name are about the web. Their
FAQ's state that as well.

Some of them specifically state that questions will be taken "in the context
of the web, unless stated otherwise". Surely you know that. How many times
have you seen a question blasted until the OP has bleated "it's for an
intranet", and then everybody says "you should have stated that up front,
you would have recieved entirely different answers"? I myself have typed
that phrase in many times during your year of lurking

> is about HTML. HTML gets used in a
> wide range of situations. I've seen office applications, html-based, that
> couldn't have been developed without frames. Good applications, well
> designed in all aspects I could think of, userfriendly, to be used only in
> a very specific and enclosed environment by trained people. I think there
> are situations where utilisation of frames is not only a legit thing to
> do, it is the best option to choose


Agreed. Indeed I have help systems written in HTML with frames that emulate
the windows help system. Contents on the left, content on the right but they
are *not* the web. They don't need to be bookmarked etc.

This stuff is not web.

If Miss Jacky had said "I am starting a new intranet help site" then your
argument would hold. She did not. She said "new web site". Frames have no
place on the web so, I suppose, all the above is OT
>
> But that is just an opinion and has a value equal to other argumented
> opinions.


Yep, and mine as well.

Crikey, it's time for another beer. See ya

--
Cheers
Richard.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Lauri Raittila
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
in alt.html, Barbara de Zoete wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:26:53 -0600, Richard <Anonymous@127.001> wrote:
>
> > Miss Jacky wrote:
> >
> >> Hi. I am starting up a new web site and need some advice. I was
> >> wondering if you guys could tell me how I would be able to have frames.

> >
> > Frames are out...
> >

>
> No, they are not. They are very useful in certain situations.


I have seen one, in 10 years I have been aware of HTML. Surprisingly it
was this year. I don't remember the purpose though...

(of course, thre was few years in start whitout frames...)

> > ..CSS is IN!

> It's not IN at all. It is just a very efficient way to create and maintain
> presentation and layout for you pages if rendered in amodern graphical
> browser.


And


> > You can do more with CSS
> >

>
> Can yuo substantiate that claim?


Easily

> Can you for instance, create a fixed top
> and left column with valid HTML 4.01 strict, CSS2.1 and rendered in
> standards compliant mode that works cross browser (including the ancient
> browser IE6)?


Yes. But I have to cheat and use IE bugs...

But I just hate fixed top and left columns, so I have not done that.

> > and not have the problems frames create.
> >

>
> If frames are done properly, there are no problems.


There is. Search engines. Hard to say wich others, as you don't define
proper way.

> Don't get me wrond. I don't like frames any more than you do, but throwing
> around unargumented claims is not likely going to convince anyone that
> they should grow a dislike for them too (or atleast some healthy
> suspicion).


Only problem in his post was that he didn't include some nice frames are
evil links. If he had, you would have needed to back up yourt claim, and
for example show us one site that uses frames properly.

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
 
Reply With Quote
 
Spartanicus
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
"rf" <rf@.invalid> wrote:

>You will find that the regulars here have a zero tolerance policy against
>frames.


Anyone posing as the group's spokesman is most inappropriate imo.

--
Spartanicus
 
Reply With Quote
 
jake
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
In message <KKYod.46935$(E-Mail Removed)>, rf
<rf@?.invalid> writes
>Barbara de Zoete wrote:
>
>[frames argument]
>

[snip]

>
>You will find that the regulars here have a zero tolerance policy against
>frames.

[snip]
>

............. I don't think so ............

regards.

--
Jake

 
Reply With Quote
 
jake
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
In message <(E-Mail Removed)> , Lauri
Raittila <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>in alt.html, Barbara de Zoete wrote:

[snip]

>
>> Don't get me wrond. I don't like frames any more than you do, but throwing
>> around unargumented claims is not likely going to convince anyone that
>> they should grow a dislike for them too (or atleast some healthy
>> suspicion).

>
>Only problem in his post was that he didn't include some nice frames are
>evil links. If he had, you would have needed to back up yourt claim, and
>for example show us one site that uses frames properly.
>

Visit the MSDN site if you want to see a reasonably good use of frames.

regards.

--
Jake

 
Reply With Quote
 
Duende
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
While sitting in a puddle rf scribbled in the mud:

>
> You will find that the regulars here have a zero tolerance policy against
> frames


Frames are your friends.

--
Duende (irregular)
Avoid reality at all costs.
 
Reply With Quote
 
rf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
Duende countered:
> While sitting in a puddle rf scribbled in the mud:


> > You will find that the regulars here have a zero tolerance policy

against
> > frames


> Frames are your friends.


Should have said "many of the regulars" shouldn't I

--
Cheers
Richard.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Barbara de Zoete
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-24-2004
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:07:07 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:

> Duende countered:
>> While sitting in a puddle rf scribbled in the mud:

>
>> > You will find that the regulars here have a zero tolerance policy

> against
>> > frames

>
>> Frames are your friends.

>
> Should have said "many of the regulars" shouldn't I
>


Maybe. Or maybe just speak for yourself. That is what I try to do. I find
it hard to give any credit to the argument 'it's not just me!'

--
Weblog | <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html>
Webontwerp | <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html>
Zweefvliegen | <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
having a problem with scrolling frames as if no frames surfunbear@yahoo.com HTML 0 03-08-2006 09:54 PM
Frames and borders around specific frames meyousikmann@yahoo.com HTML 1 02-10-2006 11:12 PM
Frames or not Frames... Ale HTML 17 08-05-2005 12:10 AM
Link needed to go from a non-frames page to a Frames page, and load a particular frame. How? - Newbe Philip HTML 3 06-28-2004 03:06 PM
From Frames to no frames? Powerslave2112 HTML 2 01-20-2004 10:30 PM



Advertisments