Re: Extending URL syntax for framesets?

E. Stephen Mack (estephen@emf.net)
Tue, 29 Jul 1997 05:45:28 -0700


Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19970729054528.00e9cba4@emf.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 05:45:28 -0700
To: www-html@w3.org
From: "E. Stephen Mack" <estephen@emf.net>
Subject: Re: Extending URL syntax for framesets?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970729141503.245X-100000@enoshima>

Thanks to Holger Wahlen and Martin J. Duerst for their comments
and ideas about my initial suggestion for using new URL semantics
to link to frameset instances.

Another approach that occured to me after reading their thoughts
is the following:

<A HREF="http://www.foo.com/frameset.html">
  <FRAMEHREF SRC="nav9.html" TARGET="nav">
  <FRAMEHREF SRC="cows.html" TARGET="content">
  The cows document with the nav9 navbar
</A> is an interesting frameset instance.

I'm not committed to "FRAMEHREF" at all (perhaps even the FRAME
element itself could be shoehorned into service inside an anchor
element), but the general idea is this:

By embedding one or more "frame-foo parameter" elements inside an
anchor element, we can indicate what documents should be
loaded into which named frames.

  *  The anchor element itself links to the default frameset
     document, which sets up the frame dimensions and names.

  *  However, instead of loading the initial documents into 
     named frames, browsers will take the presence of a frame-foo
     element to mean that the indicated document should
     be loaded into the TARGET named frame instead.

With something like this, at least Web authors would be able to link
to a particular frameset, but bookmarking would still be problematic.

This proposal leaves URL semantics alone, and makes this more
squarely a www-html discussion.

Maybe something like this for HTML 5.2 or 6.1...?
-- 
E. Stephen Mack <estephen@emf.net>    http://www.emf.net/~estephen/