Re: Summary: FRAMES tag references

William C. Cheng (william@cs.columbia.edu)
Fri, 12 Jan 1996 17:53:13 -0500


Message-Id: <199601122253.RAA03476@bourbon.cs.columbia.edu>
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Summary: FRAMES tag references 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:28:15 CST."
             <199601121928.NAA08170@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com> 
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 17:53:13 -0500
From: "William C. Cheng" <william@cs.columbia.edu>

Scott E. Preece <preece@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com> wrote:
> 
>    From: "William C. Cheng" <william@cs.columbia.edu>
> |
> |   Are FRAMES becoming part of HTML3?  Visually, it looks very nice in
> |   Netscape, but the syntax looks quite ugly.  The problem seems to be
> |   that connected-frames is a UI and not a mark-up novelty.
> ---
> 
> .
> .
> 
> The specification of the existence of FRAMEs, their initial contents,
> and their identities seems to me to be wholly a BODY concern - they
> define the contents of a single, aggregate resource.

This is exactly my main problem with Netscape FRAMEs.  It does *not* define
the contents of a single, aggregate resource!  Take a 2-pane example.  When
one click on an anchor on the left pane, the right pane changed.  If there
are 10 anchors in the left pane, the FRAMESET does not define 11 URLs!  It
only define the linking from one pane to another!  (I haven't seen any
bi-directional linking yet; I guess that can be interestingly confusing.)
--
Bill Cheng // Guest at Columbia Unversity Computer Science Department
william@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU      ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.columbia.edu!william
WWW Home Page: <URL:http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~william>