W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2000

Re: XHTML 1.1 : no frames

From: Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 09:57:59 -0700
Message-Id: <200008311700.NAA22752@tux.w3.org>
To: Karl Dubost <kd@w3.org>, "www-html@w3.org" <www-html@w3.org>
From: Karl Dubost <kd@w3.org>
Date: Thu, Aug 31, 2000, 9:23 AM

> Absolute positioning in CSS is far better than frame to have non
> scrollable menu in terms of accessibility, URL usability, etc.

To be precise, what you are looking for is position:fixed (as defined in
CSS-2) to place the elements which you wish to function as frames, and the
overflow property to determine whether or not they have scrollbars.

You can even use <object type="text/html" data="http://....."></object> to
place content from external HTML files. However there is no way to have
links in one object target the contents of another object, which is
unfortunate because it would have been very simple to do (add the "name"
attribute to the "object" tag, and allow the "target" attribute on "a

Ok HTML4 historians, why the heck wasn't the "NAME" attribute (as present on
IFRAME) allowed on "OBJECT"?  This would have allowed using OBJECT as a
strict generic replacement for IFRAME.  Could we fix this in an HTML4.02?

And, unfortunately, a "strict" alternative to the resizability functionality
of frames is still missing from a W3C Rec.

So, we're getting there, but we're not there yet.


The body cannot live without the mind.      http://www.microsoft.com/mac/ie/
Received on Thursday, 31 August 2000 13:00:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:54 UTC