What are the advantages n disadvantages of using frames?

[jj]

Care to enlight?
Thanks!

[David Dorward]

jj wrote:

Care to enlight?
Thanks!

Tip: Let the body of the message stand on its own.

Advantages of frames: If implemented badly can save bandwidth and effort.

Disadvantages of frames: Lots. Lots and lots and lots.
http://stone.thecoreworlds.net/www/frames/

--
David Dorward http://david.us-lot.org/
Redesign in progress: http://stone.thecoreworlds.net/
Microsoft announces IE is dead (so upgrade):
http://minutillo.com/steve/weblog/20...ces-ie-is-dead

[Dylan Parry]

David Dorward wrote:

Advantages of frames: If implemented badly can save bandwidth and
effort. ^^^^^

Go back to bed David :o)

--
Dylan Parry - http://www.DylanParry.com

Not playing any music, but savouring the silence.

[David Dorward]

Dylan Parry wrote:

David Dorward wrote:

Advantages of frames: If implemented badly can save bandwidth and
effort. ^^^^^

Go back to bed David :o)

I can't sleep, but I was right the first time :)

Well implemented frames have got good <noframes> content, multiple framesets
(for bookmarking) and a robots.txt that asks search engines not to index
the pages displayed in the frames (but to index the high quality <noframes>
content).

This all adds up to needing more bandwidth and work.

One day I'll get around to writing a "doing frames right" tutorial (which
will scare people away from frames forever). In the meantime[1] you can
read my week old and not heavily promoted "Protecting images and source
code from thieves" article <http://stone.thecoreworlds.net/www/hide/> and
play with my new Perl script "TOC builder"
<http://stone.thecoreworlds.net/software/tocbuilder/>

Comments on both would be welcome, but I may not respond for a little while
as in 3 hours time I'm leaving for the Lake District for 4 days of peace
and quiet. :)

[1] Now I will spam the group with on-topic content as revenge for having to
defend myself.

--
David Dorward http://david.us-lot.org/
With a brain that is oddly sharp for 4am

[Jacqui or (maybe) Pete]

In article <be*******************@news.demon.co.uk>, do*****@yahoo.com
says...

Dylan Parry wrote:

David Dorward wrote:

Advantages of frames: If implemented badly can save bandwidth and
effort. ^^^^^

Go back to bed David :o)

I can't sleep, but I was right the first time :)

I agree that you're right. If "implemented badly" (sic) they can save a
lot of bandwidth by ensuring your site never shows up in search engines

:0)

[Dan Langille]

On 4 Jul 2003 19:04:07 -0700, tw*******@yahoo.com (jj) wrote:

Care to enlight?

One thing about frames which greatly annoys me is the inability to bookmark
a page once I've found it. Or copy and paste a URL to give to someone
else.
--
Dan Langille
resume: http://www.langille.org/

[Dylan Parry]

Jacqui or Pete wrote:

I agree that you're right. If "implemented badly" (sic) they can save a
lot of bandwidth by ensuring your site never shows up in search engines

Yeah, I can see his point now. Yet I also think that a site made in Front
Page will also save you bandwidth in that no-one will want to visit twice.

--
Dylan Parry - http://www.DylanParry.com

Not playing any music, but savouring the silence.

[Jacqui or (maybe) Pete]

In article <pa****************************@webpageworkshop.co .uk>,
dy***@webpageworkshop.co.uk says...

Jacqui or Pete wrote:

I agree that you're right. If "implemented badly" (sic) they can save a
lot of bandwidth by ensuring your site never shows up in search engines

Yeah, I can see his point now. Yet I also think that a site made in Front
Page will also save you bandwidth in that no-one will want to visit twice.

True, but then with frames no-one can bookmark the things they want to
see, which also cuts down on visits. I guess a combination of the two
would be ideal? With 8px text so the content is unreadable?

[John]

In article <36********************************@4ax.com>, usenet02
@YEAH.RIGHT.dvl-software.com.invalid says...

On 4 Jul 2003 19:04:07 -0700, tw*******@yahoo.com (jj) wrote:

Care to enlight?

One thing about frames which greatly annoys me is the inability to bookmark
a page once I've found it. Or copy and paste a URL to give to someone
else.

I keep seeing people saying that, and I just don't get it. Am I the only
person in the world with a right mouse button? Sure, you bookmark the
page out of its frameset context. If the site author hasn't provided the
means to get back in frame (if it matters), then it's a poorly done site.
But hardly more contemptible, for purposes of this NG I should think,
than a non-frames site with misbegotten DHTML, flash nav, and 1001
validation errors.

John
_______________________________________________
C'est la vie! C'est la guerre! Say no more!

[Leslie]

On 4 Jul 2003 19:04:07 -0700, tw*******@yahoo.com (jj) wrote:

Care to enlight?
Thanks!

One of my biggest complaints about framed sites is when the author
provides links to outside sites, but leaves them trapped within their
frame. For this reason I've added a "break free of frames" link on a
lot of the pages for which I'm responsible.

In the past I've emailed the author of those framed sites and asked to
have my link modified so that my site is no longer 'trapped' in their
frame. Most of the time I got no response (and no change in the way
the link is coded) or if I did get a response, it said one of two
things, "Huh? I don't understand what you mean." or "I don't want
visitors to leave my site to visit yours."

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Just my $.02.

Leslie
Leslie's Audio Trivia
http://www.BessieBee.com/Trivia/

[Flat Earth]

"jj" <tw*******@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7d**************************@posting.google.c om...

Care to enlight?
Thanks!

what's most startling are the lame-ass sites done by these folk with the big
opinions.

[John]

In article <fj********************************@4ax.com>,
ga*****@bessiebee.com says...

On 4 Jul 2003 19:04:07 -0700, tw*******@yahoo.com (jj) wrote:

Care to enlight?
Thanks!

One of my biggest complaints about framed sites is when the author
provides links to outside sites, but leaves them trapped within their
frame. For this reason I've added a "break free of frames" link on a
lot of the pages for which I'm responsible.

[snip] Leslie
Leslie's Audio Trivia
http://www.BessieBee.com/Trivia/

Well, again, in at least IE and Mozilla, probably also NS and Opera,
right click on the link and you have the option of opening it in a new
window independent of the frame.

John
_______________________________________________
C'est la vie! C'est la guerre! Say no more!

[Jonathan Snook]

"John" <jc****@delete.email.com> wrote in message
news:MP************************@news.sunflower.com ...

One thing about frames which greatly annoys me is the inability to bookmark a page once I've found it. Or copy and paste a URL to give to someone
else.

I keep seeing people saying that, and I just don't get it. Am I the only
person in the world with a right mouse button? Sure, you bookmark the

Y'know how often my wife sends me links to a framesetted site? "Look at
this!" she says, only to find the home page and not whatever it was she was
looking at. She doesn't know enough about how a web page goes together to
understand that what is in the address bar is different than the page she's
looking at. And she shouldn't have to.

Jonathan

[P]

what's most startling are the lame-ass sites done by these folk with the big
opinions.

No, what's most startling is how mean people are on newsgroups sometimes. Let's try keeping it civil and respectful, please!

--
P@tty Ayers
http://www.WebDevBiz.com
Web Design Contract, Estimate Worksheet
--

[P]

> One of my biggest complaints about framed sites is when the author

provides links to outside sites, but leaves them trapped within their
frame. ..

Leslie - I understand that there are possible copyright considerations in doing that, since the "framer" is giving the impression that the "trapped" site is his own work. For me, it's highly unlikely that I'll ever take someone to court for doing it, so to some extent that's a moot point. But I've started to put a clause in my Copyright Notice on sites stating, "Framing of this site by outside parties is strictly prohibited", in hopes of being in a slightly stronger position if and when I have to confront them, as you have.

I don't expect miracles, but I figure it's wise to take what precautions I can. :-)

--
P@tty Ayers
http://www.WebDevBiz.com
Web Design Contract, Estimate Worksheet
--

[John]

In article <ra*******************@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.r ogers.com>,
go***************@snook.ca says...

"John" <jc****@delete.email.com> wrote in message
news:MP************************@news.sunflower.com ...

One thing about frames which greatly annoys me is the inability to bookmark a page once I've found it. Or copy and paste a URL to give to someone
else.

I keep seeing people saying that, and I just don't get it. Am I the only
person in the world with a right mouse button? Sure, you bookmark the

Y'know how often my wife sends me links to a framesetted site? "Look at
this!" she says, only to find the home page and not whatever it was she was
looking at. She doesn't know enough about how a web page goes together to
understand that what is in the address bar is different than the page she's
looking at. And she shouldn't have to.

Jonathan

I understand what you're saying. But it's not a matter of whether she
needs to understand how a web page goes together but rather understanding
how to use the features of her browser. Modern browsers have features
that "average" surfers don't bother to learn about, but if they did their
internet experience would be enhanced. Should browser developers scrap
the right click menu, for example, because as a policy matter web authors
should not design sites where such a menu is useful? Should site authors
design their sites having in mind the capabilities of modern browsers, or
only the capabilities of newbie AOLers? Of course, they should have both
in mind, but I think they should be free to then decide on the design
they like best. Unless they are a government site or government sponsored
site, in which case all the rules about accessibility should apply, along
with lowest common denominator usability.

John
_______________________________________________
C'est la vie! C'est la guerre! Say no more!

[Stephen Poley]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 02:54:47 -0500, "Rote, Kyle" <Ky*********@aol.com>
wrote:

No, what's most startling is how mean people are on newsgroups sometimes.
Let's try keeping it civil and respectful, please!

--
P@tty Ayers
http://www.WebDevBiz.com
Web Design Contract, Estimate Worksheet
--

i don't think it's mean to notice that the most opinionated, sarcastic, and
sometimes just plain nasty people who take it upon themselves to skewer
anyone who comes here with a legit question, are not necessarily making the
most wonderful sites in the world. In fact, checking a few in this thread
and others, I find some of the sites downright dull, and worse. Their code
may be perfect and validate like crazy, but in the final analysis, that's
not the measure of a topflight web site.

At least not IMHO.

Are you suggesting that a site produced by a single person in his/her
spare time should be comparable with sites produced by organisations
with turnovers of thousands of millions of dollars? Is that reasonable?

I reckon I understand HTML/CSS better than many of the people out there
who call themselves web-designers, but I make no claim to be a graphical
designer. So there is little point looking at my site for elaborate
logos and banners.

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/

[Steven Dilley]

"Dan Langille" <us******@YEAH.RIGHT.dvl-software.com.invalid> wrote in
message news:36********************************@4ax.com...

One thing about frames which greatly annoys me is the inability to bookmark a page once I've found it. Or copy and paste a URL to give to someone
else.
--

This is also a problem with ASP/JSP pages. There was a page on the Sun site
that I went to often. It took six clicks to get there from the bookmark.

[Dylan Parry]

Steven Dilley wrote:

One thing about frames which greatly annoys me is the inability to
bookmark a page once I've found it. Or copy and paste a URL to give to
someone else.

This is also a problem with ASP/JSP pages. There was a page on the Sun
site that I went to often. It took six clicks to get there from the
bookmark.

This only occurs when the page relies upon POST data submitted by a form,
whereas most dynamically created pages will use GET data, which is part of
the URL and is 100% bookmarkable(?).

--
Dylan Parry - http://www.DylanParry.com

Not playing any music, but savouring the silence.

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Mon, Jul 7, Dylan Parry inscribed on the eternal scroll:

This only occurs when the page relies upon POST data submitted by a form,
whereas most dynamically created pages will use GET data, which is part of
the URL and is 100% bookmarkable(?).

Nah - plenty of sites when I revisit with a bookmarked URL they
tell me that my "session has expired" and to go back to the front door
and start again. Ratbags.

[Rote, Kyle]

> Are you suggesting that a site produced by a single person in his/her

spare time should be comparable with sites produced by organisations
with turnovers of thousands of millions of dollars? Is that reasonable?

I reckon I understand HTML/CSS better than many of the people out there
who call themselves web-designers, but I make no claim to be a graphical
designer. So there is little point looking at my site for elaborate

I ignore the big money sites. I am not pleased by crap sites whoever makes
them. That you know HTML is great, but what good is it if you can't make a
good looking site?

Besides, maybe you're not the guy smarting off about the questions some new
folk bring in here.

Here's the new rule: If you're gonna be pissy to somebody who has a dumb
question about frames, tables, css, which software, etc., then your site
better damn well be aces.

And no excuses, either. Maybe the guy with the dumb question has a terrific
site with very bad HTML under it. Is he worse off?

[Matthias Gutfeldt]

Rote, Kyle wrote:

Here's the new rule: If you're gonna be pissy to somebody who has a dumb
question about frames, tables, css, which software, etc., then your site
better damn well be aces.

You're pissy. What's your site?
Matthias

[John]

In article <w2WNa.50967$Xm3.12010@sccrnsc02>, br***@wfcr.org.invalid-
remove-this-part says...

John wrote:

One of my biggest complaints about framed sites is when the author
provides links to outside sites, but leaves them trapped within their
frame. For this reason I've added a "break free of frames" link on a
lot of the pages for which I'm responsible.

Well, again, in at least IE and Mozilla, probably also NS and Opera,
right click on the link and you have the option of opening it in a new
window independent of the frame.

That doesn't really help her prevent the problem of other sites
framing her content, does it? Unless you propose Leslie go to her/his
visitors' computers, lean over them with an "excuse me," and right
click for them.

I thought he was talking about her as a "user", not an "author". Today's
browsers give the "user" ability get out of a frame when he/she wants.
An "author" might object if a site provides a link to his/her site but
it's displayed in the first site's frame. Aside from the question
whether that's worse than providing no link at all, what if the user
prefers it that way? I've seen lots of posts in this NG decrying authors
who want to limit the user's options or try to dictate the user's
experience with fixed font sizes and colors, for example. Shall we
dictate that users have to view every site or page in a new window? I
often prefer just sampling a link to see if it's something I'd like to
explore after I'm done where I'm at; as opposed to leaving where I'm at
and back-buttoning to where I left off. Mozilla-style tabbed windows are
handy in that regard. In a sense they're an extension of the frame
concept.

Mind, I'm not in the least defending stupid thoughtless framesets, and
often they are produced by idiots. I have no issue condemning crappy
sites and rebuking thoughtless lazy authors who clutter the bandwidth
with drek, whether frames or non-frames. But I've seen plenty of framed
sites that I thought were well crafted for their purposes and my ease of
navigation, I found them enjoyable and useful, and I returned to them
often.

John

[EightNineThree]

"John" <jc****@delete.email.com> wrote in message
news:MP************************@news.sunflower.com ...

In article <be**********@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>,
ei************@REMOVEeightninethree.com says...

Yes. HTML is the language of the Internet. If you're not speaking it, you're speaking gibberish.
"The Importance Of Standards Compliance and The Process of Validation"
http://www.theoryxdesign.com/articles/article.php?id=9

That site is under construction sweet pea. I'll make sure I post here when its purdy just for you.
--
Karl Core

Karl - I just wanted to stick my head in to compliment your scholarly
article. It's been added to my "useful HTML stuff" section of bookmarks.
Only, if may be so bold, a reference to Tidy in the notes and links
section might fit nicely. I always hit my "tidy" button first. It's very
quick and lets me reduce the workload on W3C.

Thanks John!
I'll be sure to include that on my next update.
--
Karl Core

Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.

[John]

In article <0h********************************@4ax.com>,
ga*****@bessiebee.com says...

I object to being trapped in frames both as a "user" and as an
"author."
If the site is "well crafted" (which I would define as done competently
by a conscientious author in pursuit of legitimate objectives after due
consideration of the alternatives and the consequences) then I don't
object.
Gotta plead ignorance here; how do I use today's browsers to get out
of a frame when I want to? I'm sure it's simple, but I don't know
how!
Point to link, click right mouse button, select "new window" if IE or
either "new window" or "new tab" if Mozilla. One might object to this if
one objects to having two windows or two tabs open. Personally it doesn't
bother me. Even if you close the new window, the visit to that site is
still preserved in the "history" list (not the back-button list) in the
open browser window. In fact, the "history" list includes pages that were
displayed in the frame. So you can go to your "history" list and open the
page without the original site's frame. Interestingly, pages on the
framed site that are displayed in the frame are listed under "pages
visited at [name of framed site]" whereas outside pages are listed in
their own right even though they were displayed in the frame.
Why would a user prefer to be sent to a site while still trapped in
the first site's frames? It doesn't follow that a link from a framed
site necessitates the opening of a new window. In the vast majority
of cases I think the authors of framed sites are just ignorant of the
proper coding to make linked sites 'break free.'
Just another personal preference on my part. Sometimes I don't want to
leave the site I'm at, I just want to check the link to see if it
contributes to what I'm doing. If it looks like a site I'd like to
explore, I bookmark it (or get it from my history list) and go there
later. I DO agree with you that the majority of framed sites illustrate
ignorance, neglect, and/or disrespect on the part of the author. If I'm
taking a position here, it's that this is the reason frames are bad; not
that frames are bad per se. However, this is like saying guns don't kill
people, people kill people. It doesn't necessarily settle the issue.
IMHO it follows that a "well crafted" site with frames will provide
links that aren't trapped. And yes, I've also found sites with frames
that are enjoyable and useful, but they are few and far between.
I think it depends on the link's context. If it's an essay with an inline
link to an outside reference, I think it's okay to have it open in the
frame. For example, "John Smith made similar observations in <a href="URI
for John Smith's essay">his 1992 essay</a> on the subject." I'd just as
soon see Smith's essay in the frame. If he has other links, I'll bookmark
him and go back later to explore his site. This gets into copyright,
attribution, and fair use issues, but that's another topic!
Again, just my $.02.

Leslie

When people put in their $.02 the way you did, people like me learn
things. And I *have* learned a couple of things as a result of this
exchange. Thank you.

John
__________________________________________________ ___
She was only a whiskey maker, but he loved her still.

[WeSaySo]

Leslie <ga*****@bessiebee.com> wrote on Tue 08 Jul 2003 04:01:55p:

Gotta plead ignorance here; how do I use today's browsers to get out
of a frame when I want to? I'm sure it's simple, but I don't know
how!

Netscape and Mozilla provide a context menu option to a) show only the
selected frame (e.g. current window), b) open the selected frame in a new
window, c) open the selected frame in a new tab. It also allows for
bookmarking just that particular frame URL as well, which was mentioned
earlier in the thread.

hn

[Rote, Kyle]

Design 101:

http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/nov02.asp

"EightNineThree" <ei************@REMOVEeightninethree.com> wrote in message
news:be**********@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...

"Rote, Kyle" <Ky*********@aol.com> wrote in message
news:z_********************@comcast.com...

Are you suggesting that a site produced by a single person in his/her
spare time should be comparable with sites produced by organisations
with turnovers of thousands of millions of dollars? Is that reasonable?
I reckon I understand HTML/CSS better than many of the people out there who call themselves web-designers, but I make no claim to be a graphical designer. So there is little point looking at my site for elaborate
I ignore the big money sites. I am not pleased by crap sites whoever makes them. That you know HTML is great, but what good is it if you can't make a good looking site?

Besides, maybe you're not the guy smarting off about the questions some

new

folk bring in here.

Here's the new rule: If you're gonna be pissy to somebody who has a dumb question about frames, tables, css, which software, etc., then your site
better damn well be aces.

This is comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, not alt.purdy.website
Discussions here revolve around HTML because that is what the newsgroup is
for.
I recon many people here work in the production/ development side of

things. Most of the better web design companies that I know of are smart enough to
recognize that the best production people aren't necessarily very artistic
and vice versa.

So if your own work is so fucking great let's see it, then.

And no excuses, either. Maybe the guy with the dumb question has a terrific

site with very bad HTML under it. Is he worse off?

Yes. HTML is the language of the Internet. If you're not speaking it,

you're speaking gibberish.
"The Importance Of Standards Compliance and The Process of Validation"
http://www.theoryxdesign.com/articles/article.php?id=9

That site is under construction sweet pea. I'll make sure I post here when
its purdy just for you.
--
Karl Core

Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.