W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > October 2002

Re: XFrames - Resurrected Zombies? (was: Comments on HLink)

From: Lachlan Cannon <luminosity@members.evolt.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 00:29:44 +1000
Message-ID: <3D99B158.4040003@members.evolt.org>
To: www-html@w3.org

Steven Pemberton wrote:
> "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>:
>>I agree with this... I don't see how XFrames particularly help with
>>search engines really. It does make it easier for them to return
>>results to framesets, but that seems to be all.
> "That's all"? That's already quite a lot. Search engines cannot currently
> return pages in the context that they are designed in. So you get a page
> with a lot of context missing. XFrames allows them to return the page in the
> context you would normally see it in.
> It doesn't help search engines *find* results, it helps them *return* them.

Yes, but how does the search engine determine the *best* frame set to 
return? In some cases the single page by itself might be better, and 
there might be different framesets referencing the  page you want. Also, 
this brings up a possible problem of search engine spamming -- instead 
of getting theone relevant result that is that page, suddenly I might 
get ten different framesets which reference that page, thus making it 
even harder to find what I actually want. IMO, frames should be dropped 
Web: http://illuminosity.net/
E-mail: lach @ illuminosity.net
MSN: luminosity @ members.evolt.org
Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2002 10:35:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:01 UTC