frames

[David de Kloet]

Hi,

My website uses frames and one should always load the frameset and not
only one of the frames. Is there a nice way to ensure/check that a page is
actualy loaded within a frameset?

thanks,

David

[PeterMcC]

David de Kloet wrote:

Hi,

My website uses frames and one should always load the frameset and not
only one of the frames. Is there a nice way to ensure/check that a
page is actualy loaded within a frameset?

Well, if you must use frames...

Putting the following in the head of your pages will mean that, in the event
of a frame being loaded without the frameset, the page will default to
index.html. Whilst this doesn't give the visitor the framed page that they
were expecting, it does give them a complete frameset with a menu so that
they can at least navigate the site.

<script language="javascript">
if (document.location == top.location)
{
document.location="index.html";
}
</script>

I'd also suggest that there are lots of ways of getting rid of frames - the
"I want to have the same menu on every page without repeating it" is the
benefit that I hear most often and that's easily solved with includes:
http://www.bignosebird.com/sdocs/include.shtml

HTH
--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

[David de Kloet]

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, PeterMcC wrote:

Well, if you must use frames...
I know what you mean.
<script language="javascript">
if (document.location == top.location)
{
document.location="index.html";
}
</script>
Thanks, just what I was looking for.
I'd also suggest that there are lots of ways of getting rid of frames - the
"I want to have the same menu on every page without repeating it" is the
benefit that I hear most often and that's easily solved with includes:
http://www.bignosebird.com/sdocs/include.shtml

I'm aware that you should reconsider the moment you want to you frames but
I think frames serve a purpous on my site so I'll just keep my frames.
David

[Jeffrey Silverman]

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:52:50 +0200, David de Kloet wrote:

Hi,

My website uses frames and one should always load the frameset and not
only one of the frames. Is there a nice way to ensure/check that a page is
actualy loaded within a frameset?

thanks,

David

Yes. Never, *ever*, use frames.

problem solved.
--
Jeffrey D. Silverman | jeffrey AT jhu DOT edu
Johns Hopkins University | Baltimore, MD
Website | http://www.wse.jhu.edu/newtnotes/

[Marc]

> > My website uses frames and one should always load the frameset and not

only one of the frames. Is there a nice way to ensure/check that a page is actualy loaded within a frameset?

Yes. Never, *ever*, use frames.

problem solved.

That's silly. There are several places when using frames is a good idea.
One example that comes to mind is firmware for a router or somesuch that has
a web interface. No PHP or ASP server can be run there, so frames provide a
good way to show a menu on all pages.

If they were pointless, then W3C would have depreciated them long ago.

[Jeffrey Silverman]

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:28:33 +0100, Marc wrote:

> My website uses frames and one should always load the frameset and not
> only one of the frames. Is there a nice way to ensure/check that a
> page is > actualy loaded within a frameset?

Yes. Never, *ever*, use frames.

problem solved.

That's silly. There are several places when using frames is a good idea.
One example that comes to mind is firmware for a router or somesuch that
has a web interface. No PHP or ASP server can be run there, so frames
provide a good way to show a menu on all pages.

If they were pointless, then W3C would have depreciated them long ago.

Yes, but he is not developing firmware for a router, is he?

As far a 94.8% of website devlopment goes, frames are a bad idea. This
means, for all intents and purposes, *never* use frames.

Allright, allright, I get your point. Okay, I amend my statement.

Only use frames if you *really* *really* *really* know what you are doing,
or are developing firmware for a router.

later...
--
Jeffrey D. Silverman | jeffrey AT jhu DOT edu
Johns Hopkins University | Baltimore, MD
Website | http://www.wse.jhu.edu/newtnotes/

[Steve Pugh]

"Marc" <[e-mail]> wrote:

That's silly. There are several places when using frames is a good idea.
One example that comes to mind is firmware for a router or somesuch that has
a web interface. No PHP or ASP server can be run there, so frames provide a
good way to show a menu on all pages.
1. Why do you need to show a menu on all pages? Isn't a link back to a
dedicated menu page as good if not better?
2. Even if you need to show a menu on all pages why does it need to be
in a frame and not part of the real page?
If they were pointless, then W3C would have depreciated them long ago.

ITYM deprecated (no 'i'). And is 1997 long enough ago for you? Frames
were deprecated as soon as they were standardised.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>

[David de Kloet]

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Jeffrey Silverman wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:28:33 +0100, Marc wrote:

Yes. Never, *ever*, use frames.

problem solved.
That's silly. There are several places when using frames is a good idea.
One example that comes to mind is firmware for a router or somesuch that
has a web interface. No PHP or ASP server can be run there, so frames
provide a good way to show a menu on all pages.

If they were pointless, then W3C would have depreciated them long ago.

Yes, but he is not developing firmware for a router, is he?

No I'm not. I have two frames, left and right. At the left you can search
a database and get results. If you click on a search result at the left,
the frame at the right displays details about the chosen result.

If you know "Magic: the Gathering" you can try it at:
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~dskloet/magic

How would you replace these frames?

As far a 94.8% of website devlopment goes, frames are a bad idea. This
means, for all intents and purposes, *never* use frames.

Allright, allright, I get your point. Okay, I amend my statement.

Only use frames if you *really* *really* *really* know what you are doing,
or are developing firmware for a router.

later...

David

[David Dorward]

PeterMcC wrote:

Putting the following in the head of your pages will mean that, in the
event of a frame being loaded without the frameset, the page will default
to index.html. Whilst this doesn't give the visitor the framed page that
they were expecting, it does give them a complete frameset with a menu so
that they can at least navigate the site.

Example of what happens when you use this method. (Real example)

A user (lets call him 'David Dorward') searches Google for information.
David finds a site with the information.
David clicks the link and waits for page to load.
David looks for the information.
He can't find it.
After a while he goes back to google and looks for a different side with the
information on it.

(Then becuase he can't find any other site (unusual) he disables JS, goes
back to the site, and notices that it looks entirely different to the way
it looked last time - becuase without JS he didn't get redirected to the
homepage).
--
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

[Isofarro]

Marc wrote:

Yes. Never, *ever*, use frames.

problem solved.

That's silly. There are several places when using frames is a good idea.

As a cheap-man's server side include a good idea it isn't.
--
Iso.
FAQs: http://html-faq.com http://alt-html.org http://allmyfaqs.com/
Recommended Hosting: http://www.affordablehost.com/
Web Standards: http://www.webstandards.org/

[David Dorward]

Paul Liversidge wrote:

There is an alternative to this. There is a product called Framejammer
that is a Dreamweaver extension. It's a little bit of JavaScript that
sits in every page. When a framed page is requested, it realises that
it's frameset isn't present, loads the frameset and loads the page.
It's a bit like how MSDN works.

(a) Only works when JS is available
(b) You still need a frameset document for every combination of pages.

--
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

[Marc]

> >That's silly. There are several places when using frames is a good idea.

One example that comes to mind is firmware for a router or somesuch that hasa web interface. No PHP or ASP server can be run there, so frames provide agood way to show a menu on all pages.
1. Why do you need to show a menu on all pages? Isn't a link back to a
dedicated menu page as good if not better?

Fair point.
2. Even if you need to show a menu on all pages why does it need to be
in a frame and not part of the real page?

This is a problem becuase the device has a very limited space allowance, and
thus anything to reduce file size is a must.

If they were pointless, then W3C would have depreciated them long ago.

ITYM deprecated (no 'i'). And is 1997 long enough ago for you? Frames
were deprecated as soon as they were standardised.

What is ITYM?

[Marc]

> >> Yes. Never, *ever*, use frames.

problem solved.
That's silly. There are several places when using frames is a good

idea.
As a cheap-man's server side include a good idea it isn't.

OK, maybe 'a good idea' should have been 'nearly the only option'.

[Kevin Thorpe]

Jeffrey Silverman wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:52:50 +0200, David de Kloet wrote:

Hi,

My website uses frames and one should always load the frameset and not
only one of the frames. Is there a nice way to ensure/check that a page is
actualy loaded within a frameset?

Yes. Never, *ever*, use frames.

Why not? Sometimes they're really useful. Do you always use Windows
Explorer with the folder list turned off?

I would correct your statement above to:
Use frames only if there is a significant benefit in using them.

....but of course frames/no frames is a religious argument so there will
be no consensus.

[David Robley]

In article <Pi*******************************@keg.cs.vu.nl> ,
ds*****@cs.vu.nl says...

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Jeffrey Silverman wrote:

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:28:33 +0100, Marc wrote:

> Yes. Never, *ever*, use frames.
>
> problem solved.

That's silly. There are several places when using frames is a good idea.
One example that comes to mind is firmware for a router or somesuch that
has a web interface. No PHP or ASP server can be run there, so frames
provide a good way to show a menu on all pages.

If they were pointless, then W3C would have depreciated them long ago.

Yes, but he is not developing firmware for a router, is he?

No I'm not. I have two frames, left and right. At the left you can search
a database and get results. If you click on a search result at the left,
the frame at the right displays details about the chosen result.

If you know "Magic: the Gathering" you can try it at:
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~dskloet/magic

How would you replace these frames?

Didn't look at the referenced URL but...

ASCII ART WARNING - USE FIXED FONT

HEADER PART shows whatever blah blah blah

menu1 | main page
menu2 | main page
menu3 | main page
menu4 | main page
This page sponsored by blah wibble etc

Where you use a prepend/append pair of pages to create the header and menu
(prepend) and append to do the 'This page...' and the main part of the
page is the 'current script'

For an example see http://auseinet.flinders.edu.au

--
Quod subigo farinam

$email =~ s/oz$/au/o;

[David de Kloet]

On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, David Robley wrote:

<snip>

Yes, but he is not developing firmware for a router, is he?

No I'm not. I have two frames, left and right. At the left you can search
a database and get results. If you click on a search result at the left,
the frame at the right displays details about the chosen result.

If you know "Magic: the Gathering" you can try it at:
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~dskloet/magic

How would you replace these frames?

Didn't look at the referenced URL but...

And you didn't read my post either. I don't have a menu and I wouldn't use
frames to implement one.

<about a menu>

David

[David Robley]

In article <Pi*******************************@keg.cs.vu.nl> ,
ds*****@cs.vu.nl says...

On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, David Robley wrote:

<snip>

> Yes, but he is not developing firmware for a router, is he?

No I'm not. I have two frames, left and right. At the left you can search
a database and get results. If you click on a search result at the left,
the frame at the right displays details about the chosen result.

If you know "Magic: the Gathering" you can try it at:
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~dskloet/magic

How would you replace these frames?

Didn't look at the referenced URL but...

And you didn't read my post either. I don't have a menu and I wouldn't use
frames to implement one.

<about a menu>

David

I don't believe I suggested frames. I do believe that my suggestion could
be adapted to a list of options on the left and results on the right,
rather than a menu; in any case avoiding the use of frames. Of course if
the use of frames is a necessity then my suggestion is of no use.

--
Quod subigo farinam

$email =~ s/oz$/au/o;

[David de Kloet]

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, David Robley wrote:

I don't believe I suggested frames. I do believe that my suggestion could
be adapted to a list of options on the left and results on the right,
rather than a menu; in any case avoiding the use of frames. Of course if
the use of frames is a necessity then my suggestion is of no use.

The problem is that the list of options requires a database query to be
created which can take a few seconds. I don't like the idea of recreating
the whole list each time one of the options is selected.

David

[Marc]

> > I don't believe I suggested frames. I do believe that my suggestion
could

be adapted to a list of options on the left and results on the right,
rather than a menu; in any case avoiding the use of frames. Of course if
the use of frames is a necessity then my suggestion is of no use.

The problem is that the list of options requires a database query to be
created which can take a few seconds. I don't like the idea of recreating
the whole list each time one of the options is selected.

Looking at your page, I don't see why you need the contents of both frames
displayed at once.

Why not just add a link to the page currently in the left frame which opens
the page currently in the right frame?

[David de Kloet]

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Marc wrote:

I don't believe I suggested frames. I do believe that my suggestion could be adapted to a list of options on the left and results on the right,
rather than a menu; in any case avoiding the use of frames. Of course if
the use of frames is a necessity then my suggestion is of no use.

The problem is that the list of options requires a database query to be
created which can take a few seconds. I don't like the idea of recreating
the whole list each time one of the options is selected.

Looking at your page, I don't see why you need the contents of both frames
displayed at once.

Why not just add a link to the page currently in the left frame which opens
the page currently in the right frame?

I find it usefull to have both pages in front of me but you're right it's
not a necessity.

But this brings me to another quiestion:
If I would do as you suggest, you would do 'back' each time you want to
open another one of the found results. But if I do 'back' my browser
(Mozilla) says the POSTDATA has expired so he has to post it again
(instead of getting te page from cache). Can you tell me how I keep the
postdata from expiring?

David