468,514 Members | 1,636 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 468,514 developers. It's quick & easy.

An alternative to framesets?

So I was wondering, what possible replacements are there for the frameset? Because I just want to have my menu and article column be static and not have to be reloaded again, all I really want to be changed is the main content in the page. I understand framesets are, and have been looked down upon for quite some time; quite litterally I don't like them myself. Is it possible to make a div with the contents of that div being a DHTML file?

I want to find an alternative to framesets, while still having relatively small amounts of code, and not having to go through 8-12 pages when I want to edit the menu or articles column.

help?
Jul 24 '08 #1
8 11713
tharden3
916 512MB
can't you solve this by experimenting with the static/absolute/relavtive/fixed functions? I guess maybe you could put those in combination with a div, but I'm not sure. You'd have to try it I guess.
Jul 25 '08 #2
oler1s
671 Expert 512MB
There isn’t any direct replacement for a frameset. If you’re looking to include one HTML document within another, without using a frameset, it is not possible. You cannot divide your HTML document through HTML alone. Yes, this incurs bandwidth penalties when parts of your site are unchanging. You can reduce the penalty by properly using CSS and keeping the HTML to markup only.

With larger sites, the pages are compiled on the fly. This is done with the help of server side programming. If you’re looking for a pure HTML solution, you’re out of luck.

To keep a webpage static and reload only a portion of it, AJAX can be used. But this is not like HTML either. A significant amount of programming and work must be done on both the server and client side, and you need to have a certain level of technical expertise.
Jul 25 '08 #3
There isn’t any direct replacement for a frameset. If you’re looking to include one HTML document within another, without using a frameset, it is not possible. You cannot divide your HTML document through HTML alone. Yes, this incurs bandwidth penalties when parts of your site are unchanging. You can reduce the penalty by properly using CSS and keeping the HTML to markup only.

With larger sites, the pages are compiled on the fly. This is done with the help of server side programming. If you’re looking for a pure HTML solution, you’re out of luck.

To keep a webpage static and reload only a portion of it, AJAX can be used. But this is not like HTML either. A significant amount of programming and work must be done on both the server and client side, and you need to have a certain level of technical expertise.
Thanks ^^, although I am not looking for a pure HTML answer. As of now, I am currently teaching myself javascript and PHP. However my skills of both languages as of now are remarkably low. How would I accomplish this with CSS?
Jul 27 '08 #4
oler1s
671 Expert 512MB
How would I accomplish this with CSS?
I think you misunderstand me. CSS does not present you an alternative to framesets. I mentioned CSS as one way to reduce the bandwidth penalty of sending out similar content. If two pages use the same CSS file, said CSS file won't be requested twice, saving you a bit of bandwidth.
Jul 27 '08 #5
I think you misunderstand me. CSS does not present you an alternative to framesets. I mentioned CSS as one way to reduce the bandwidth penalty of sending out similar content. If two pages use the same CSS file, said CSS file won't be requested twice, saving you a bit of bandwidth.
okay, thanks ^^. Well, currently I am learning Ajax so, maybe I'll be able to figure out a way through that. What do you think?
Aug 5 '08 #6
acoder
16,027 Expert Mod 8TB
That's one way assuming everyone has JavaScript enabled. On the server-side, you could use SSI Server-Side Includes, if supported, or use the server-side language to include the files on each page, e.g. header, footer.
Aug 5 '08 #7
That's one way assuming everyone has JavaScript enabled. On the server-side, you could use SSI Server-Side Includes, if supported, or use the server-side language to include the files on each page, e.g. header, footer.
I need to learn more about SSI, and also couldn't you create a server where all the necessary resources are installed there, and utilzed there? So if say a spider of the web were to come to the site, they wouldn't need to have everything installed.

how would that effect the loading time?
I hope that the users don't have java disabled.
Aug 15 '08 #8
acoder
16,027 Expert Mod 8TB
Server-side Includes should probably be enough for your requirements. If you need something more advanced, use a server-side language.
Aug 16 '08 #9

Post your reply

Sign in to post your reply or Sign up for a free account.

Similar topics

9 posts views Thread by CMAR | last post: by
14 posts views Thread by x | last post: by
5 posts views Thread by Martin Franklin | last post: by
5 posts views Thread by terry | last post: by
9 posts views Thread by DaveF | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by Pete | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by lashnjo | last post: by
1 post views Thread by Mark Rae | last post: by
1 post views Thread by fmendoza | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.