W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > October to December 2004

RE: Keep Framesets in the Standards

From: Corl <corl@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:00:21 -0800
To: "Corl" <corl@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <E1CWIUI-0006c6-LS@frink.w3.org>

While SSI works for server based XHTML projects, they don't work for
non-server projects such as eBooks that are downloaded and played on a local
computer or distributed via CD/DVD-ROM. Can there be room for both SSI
(XInclude?) and XFrames so that everyone can be standards compliant?

Corl


-----Original Message-----
From: Dosuchin [mailto:gohankid77@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 1:20 PM
To: Corl
Cc: w3c
Subject: Re: Keep Framesets in the Standards

It is true that frames have a poor reputation because of how user
agents implemented them, but there has been a recent discussion about
the use of includes versus XFrames being implemented in XHTML2 [1]. In
this way, the problems of frames would be eliminated because the
includes would be a part of the content itself. This would still keep
the content separate from the presentation.
Simply put, frames are a bad idea in many cases. User agents implement
them properly, but the problem lies in the design of frames. Frames
are designed to separate one page from another. Includes are designed
to contain one page within the content of another, not separate them.
This is why server-side includes have gained popularity.

[1] - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2004Nov/0069.html 
Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 18:00:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:17:54 GMT