Re: Strange definition of Frame in Cougar DTD

Dave Raggett (dsr@w3.org)
Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:32:52 -0400 (EDT)


Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 16:32:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dave Raggett <dsr@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
In-Reply-To: <199704291618.BAA19977@vega.aichi-u.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <Pine.HPP.3.95.970429161832.25124L-100000@willow.w3.org>


Our understanding is that NOFRAMES is for content that isn't
to be shown on browsers that support frames. Netscape originally
proposed that a NOFRAMES element could follow the outer FRAMESET
element in place of the BODY element. We are loosening this
definition to allow NOFRAMES within BODY.  This gives you
greater flexibility in where you can place content for browsers
that don't support frames.

An example is the use of a list of contents which is only visible on
non-frames savvy browsers.  In this case, you would normally show
the contents in a separate frame. Placing the list in the main
document within a NOFRAMES element ensures that for frames savvy
browsers the list doesn't appear twice (in the table of contents
frame *and* the document view frame). The same document can then be
used happily for old and new browsers.

This change makes NOSCRIPT and NOFRAMES behave in the same fashion.
You use these elements when you want to include content for
downlevel browsers that shouldn't be shown on a new browser that
supports scripts or frames respectively. 

See  http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/Cougar
and  http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR/WD-frames

-- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> tel: +1 (617) 258 5741 fax: +1 (617) 258 5999
   World Wide Web Consortium, 545 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA 02139
   url = http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett