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

Re: A successor to framesets

From: Sean Hogan <shogun70@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 02:20:33 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHQTpmD8BitqjvryAU5Yk3FzMqjachfZu76xeLedfHObCqi7JQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Rendine <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Andrea Rendine
<master.skywalker.88@gmail.com> wrote:
> The end of framesets is not so difficult, and the point is correctly
> answered to by this framework.
> And this point is something every social network user can understand quite
> well:
> "How can I refer to a web page when pages are shown inside a frame rather
> than in the main window?"

Yes,  but that is only one of the many issues with the original frameset design.
Framesets seem to be a good example of

    Write one to throw away. You will anyway.

Yet in spite of the weaknesses they are still in broad use.

> It is a matter of defining  a URI that keeps track of loaded pages, but it
> had to be done in such a way that changing URI does not fire a page load
> (otherwise everything would be pointless)
> The answer is current JS history object method .pushState. that allows
> inserting an entry in the browsing context's history (corresponding to the
> currently viewed document) without triggering a navigation.

Can you point to any examples where that has been implemented robustly?

> Of course I appreciate all the native-HTML fallback concept.
> Is there a proposal behind this message or is it just to let authors know?
> (the latter purpose is appreciated, though).
>

Is my latest message to the list detailed enough for a proposal?

regards,
Sean


> 2015-04-02 23:54 GMT+02:00 Sean Hogan <shogun70@gmail.com>:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Andrea Rendine
>> <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Sean,
>> > but HyperFrameset relies on JS. So what's the difference between that
>> > and
>> > Angular?
>> > I mean, the difference is that there's a native page with main content
>> > and
>> > JS only enhances it by means of adding interactive elements around main
>> > content.
>>
>> That is the point. Web-sites that are fully functional *by default* in
>> any browser - old, new but unsupported, noscript.
>> The end-user could even have the option to disable all the enhancements.
>>
>>
>> And by "interactive elements" I mean tags (in this case custom
>> > tags, so it isn't even native HTML) whose content is updated on an XHR
>> > basis.
>> > For what I see it is not a matter of implementing it natively. It's just
>> > a
>> > new JS framework. It is somehow declarative, as the page is already
>> > built
>> > and static elements are replaced by script. But... that's it, right?
>>
>> The starting point for the design really was HTML framesets, fxing
>> things as necessary.
>> So the layout / frameset page is more-or-less a stand-alone HTML page
>> (potentially without any scripting).
>> But unlike original framesets you don't navigate to the frameset page -
>> it's just like normal navigation of a simple site but with the frameset
>> applied.
>> This isn't a new suggestion, see
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/1996Dec/0143.html
>>
>> There's a few things I haven't worked out how to do declaratively,
>> mainly hyperlink targets and state management.
>>
>> But it's very promising. The more I've worked on it the more I'm
>> surprised that there's been no apparent effort to make framesets
>> evolve for the web.
>>
>> regards,
>> Sean
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Yours respectfully,
>> > Andrea
>> >
>> > 2015-04-02 22:54 GMT+02:00 Sean Hogan <shogun70@gmail.com>:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Eihab,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for the feedback. I'm not sure what you mean by "sub-titles
>> >> on", but the video is really the best way to demonstrate the failure
>> >> modes of JS framework based sites.
>> >>
>> >> If I provide a list of the demos - with start times and a detailed
>> >> description of what they demonstrate - would that be constructive?
>> >>
>> >> regards,
>> >> Sean
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Eihab Ibrahim <eihabibrahim@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hi Sean,
>> >> >
>> >> > Have you tried watching the video with Subtitles turned on?
>> >> >
>> >> > I apologize for the confusion on my part, but I assure you it was not
>> >> > an
>> >> > impulsive response to a subject line. I sincerely thought that the
>> >> > YouTube
>> >> > submission was a prank.
>> >> >
>> >> > Please resubmit your proposal in a more accessible format and I'll be
>> >> > more
>> >> > than happy to review it and give feedback if I can.
>> >> >
>> >> > Respectfully,
>> >> >
>> >> > Eihab
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On 4/1/2015 10:44 PM, Sean Hogan wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 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, 9 April 2015 16:21:04 UTC

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