RE: Extended URL for [I]Frames (revived)

are there any documents to which people can point me explaining _why_ 
(i)frames are being removed altogether (or if anyone can just tell me then 
that woudl be fine as well)?


>From: Dave  J Woolley <david.woolley@bts.co.uk>
>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:05:35 +0100
>
> > From:	Mjumbe Ukweli [SMTP:mjumbewu@hotmail.com]
> >
> > within URIs (or has there), not just for frames, but iframes, and 
>perhaps
> > objects?
> >
>	[DJW:]  frames and iframes have *never* been in the strict
>	standards and are being taken out completely.  You might want
>	to look at Xlink, but I don't think it goes far enough to allow
>	capturing the state of dynamic content.
>
>	[ Cross post as original - www-talk will be delayed for
>	  moderation. ]
>--
>--------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------------
>Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
>except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.


                                                  &#8226; mjumbe &#8226;

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.