W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > February 2006

Re: Conflicting validation results

From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:51:32 +0200 (EET)
To: David Gatwood <dgatwood@mac.com>
cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0602251244050.26198@korppi.cs.tut.fi>

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, David Gatwood wrote:

> The problem is that it appears to be impossible, even in "loose", to legally 
> use a frameset and the NOSCRIPT tag in the same document,

The NOFRAMES element may contain a NOSCRIPT element. This won't help here, 
of course.

> which seriously 
> limits the ability to create client-side dynamic content that involves 
> frames....

(Some people say that anything that makes it more difficult to use frames 
makes things a little better...)

I guess you could create a Frameset document, with the content that you 
wish to present when scripting is disabled, and with a scripted transfer 
to an address where you have the scripting-enabled version. The problem is 
that the latter might accidentally be accessed by scripting-disabled user 
agents, causing confusion, but this won't be very probable if you don't 
announce the address anywhere and don't link to it, so that the only 
normal way to get there is via scripting.

> Looks like I'll just have to wait for a fixed version of 
> the spec before attempting compliance....

That would be a _long_ wait.

-- 
Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Received on Saturday, 25 February 2006 10:51:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:20 GMT