W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: Frames and accessibility: opinions please

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 22:15:02 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <200204252115.g3PLF2I05800@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> OK I've never (I don't think) have actually seen a frames site but what

That's almost impossible.  Virtually every second and lower rank e-commerce
site, at least UK ones, is frames based.

> does frames do that can't be done easier and more accessibly with other
> methods of construction???

Reasons people use frames (not reccommendations):

1) Fixed menu shared over multiple pages
2) Provide persistence of scripting variables across pages
3) Easy to create layouts bounded by the screen boundary on all four sides
4) The basic infrastructure also supports popping up new windows
   (seen as desirable by many/most designers!)
5) Easy to force ones own advertising onto every page provided by your
   customer
6) Effectively makes deep linking impossible (some people seem to think
   this is an advantage!  Often causes Javascript warnings as a deep 
   linked frame tries to re-establish the frameset, by going to the home
   page.)
7) Can show other people's pages as though they are yours (this is frowned 
   upon and often results in Javascript warnings as the victims try to
   escape)
8) Can provide cheap domain name hosting ("cloaked redirection") by wrapping
   an external, ISP based site in a database generated frameset, often,
   illegally containing only one frame; the address bar always shows the
   custom domain name, not the www.isp.com/~user/ URLs that really contain 
   the page.
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 18:08:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:04 GMT