Re: Strange definition of Frame in Cougar DTD

Arnaud Le Hors (lehors@w3.org)
Tue, 29 Apr 1997 18:45:08 +0200


Message-ID: <33662594.5C3@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 18:45:08 +0200
From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@w3.org>
To: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@vega.aichi-u.ac.jp>
CC: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Strange definition of Frame in Cougar DTD

Masayasu Ishikawa wrote:
> 
...
> So, Cougar specification of Frame is not compatible to those of
> Netscape Navigator or Microsoft Internet Explorer ... frame documents
> that use NOFRAMES *inside* FRAMESET (this is current practice) are
> invalid for Cougar?
> 
> BODY contents *outside* NOFRAMES is also rendered in frame-capable
> user agent? Where? If not, I can't understand the role of NOFRAMES ...
> 
> --
> Masayasu Ishikawa

Navigator and Internet Explorer both ignore a BODY element following a
FRAMESET. So the Cougar specification is compatible with these browsers.

NOFRAMES is meant to be used inside the BODY of a frame document, not
inside the BODY of the framset document.
-- 
Arnaud