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

frames continued

From: Francis X. Speiser Jr. <webmaster@cablevision-boston.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 11:35:04 -0500
Message-ID: <38849638.114BCFCF@ma.cablevision.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
> The Reverend Sayeth:
>
> In other words, if I read the XHTML intentions properly, the idea is to replace a
> specific type of framing (FRAMESET) with a more powerful and more generally useful
> sort.  I like that.
>
>

This would be nice. Actually it would be great to be able to specify areas of the page which
could be dynamic through some type of *ML, hopefully hide-able from the client's eyes if the
author chooses, so that there could be some way to display alternating content, streaming
media and other types of things. That would make my day. I work with a start-up right now and
frames is the only way I could do that so that it would work, and regardless of standards you
have to go with what works. I don't like to say that actually, and I suppose I must look like
a pillaging pirate to this list, but something needs to be done. I guess this might be able to
be combined with the suggestion of the gentleman with the <embed> recommendation, because they
seemingly go hand in hand.

I understand the separation of structure/transport and style, that makes sense, but hopefully
we can propose some type of fix for the loss of functionality in the are athat is blurred
between the two. I think that a dynamic attribute/tag, whatever you want to call it, where the
source is drawn separately and can change without affecting the other source, may be the
answer. I don't pretend to know the answer, I just pretend to know the question. I think that
this line of thinking might be on the right track, though. Maybe a base document which
reserves the area of another sheet with an include to the linked sheet, and the sheet can
change according to a meta spec if needed or other "get" related request. That way the client
can get a new document, the source is rendered and the original base document remains
unaltered.  Is anything like that in the works?

Frames are limited anyway. There are a bunch of "better" ways to do it, but the worst thing we
can do is junk the whole concept entirely in future revisions.

-Frank-

[P.S. Thanks to everyone who wrote me this weekend is support of my last post.]
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2000 11:33:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:40 GMT