What are the advantages n disadvantages of using frames?

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

In article <w2WNa.50967$Xm3.12010@sccrnsc02>, brian (AT) wfcr (DOT) 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

"John" <jcliff (AT) delete (DOT) email.com> wrote

In article <bee9aa$ilj$1 (AT) ngspool-d02 (DOT) news.aol.com>,
eightninethree (AT) REMOVEeightninethree (DOT) 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.

In article <0himgv862t5s67hap2plca7e32tj04vbf5 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com>,
garbage (AT) bessiebee (DOT) 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.

Leslie <garbage (AT) bessiebee (DOT) 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

Design 101:

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



"EightNineThree" <eightninethree (AT) REMOVEeightninethree (DOT) com> wrote

"Rote, Kyle" <Kylerote021 (AT) aol (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:z_Gdne9SzZy11ZeiXTWJgA (AT) comcast (DOT) 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.