W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2015

Re: A successor to framesets

From: Sean Hogan <shogun70@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 16:44:36 +1100
Message-ID: <CAHQTpmBMWOpAvCysuS-5ZxHmUf9BS9rwt2XP2PWcYwCzCnUZng@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eihab Ibrahim <eihabibrahim@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Eihab,

Are you saying that if I had posted this on, say, the 2nd April then
you would have given it proper consideration instead of just
responding to the Subject: line?

regards,
Sean


On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Eihab Ibrahim <eihabibrahim@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sean,
>
> It's a bit too early in the US for April fools' jokes, and I do not think this is an appropriate platform for it.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Eihab
>
> On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:56 PM, Sean Hogan <shogun70@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> HTML framesets were the original single-page-application.
>
> Despite the flaws (mostly not being content-first), at least servers
> were emitting reasonably simple HTML including real hyperlinks and
> forms.
>
> What would framesets be like if we designed them today?
>
> In the linked video I make the case for a successor to framesets.
> It is 25 minutes but that is unavoidable.
>
>    https://youtu.be/qVdAc8_ppao
>
> The first half illustrates *why* this is important / better than alternatives,
> with actual demonstrations (which you should try for yourself to
> ensure I'm not cheating).
>
> The second half provides some insight into how I've approached this,
> again with demonstrations.
>
> I'll continue later with details of the differences / enhancements
> required to make the frameset concept live up to today's expectations.
>
> regards,
> Sean
>
>
Received on Thursday, 2 April 2015 05:45:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:43 UTC