- From: Peter Brawley <pb@artfulsoftware.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:01:53 -0500
Brian, >You have specified that your requirement is to prevent people from linking to or >bookmarking individual pages inside of frames. Framesets do not satisfy that >requirement. They make it a little more difficult, but they do not prevent it. Of course the frameset /by itself /doesn't satisfy that requirement. It permits us to meet the requirement with little code. >Ian posted one, had-written just for you, which you dismissed without giving any reason. It's a nice, partial demo---side-by-side scrolling & no node bookmarking. But no borders, no resizing, no horizontal scrolling within frames, it requires a separate html page for each node, &c. So it would take a fair bit of time to see if a whole implementation of the spec could be built on it. So it does not answer the question: if framesets are as you claim not needed for the full spec, there should be lots of non-frameset sites which meet this spec as efficiently as ours does. /No-one has pointed to one./ Implementations of a part of our spec without frames, like Google docreader & MSDN, require ten times as much javascript or more, javadoc and other major help sites still use framesets, &c. >Framesets suck because they combine both layout and embedding semantics >into one syntax, which give them much less layout flexibility than using CSS. If that blocks a use case, by all means don't use a frameset for it. For this use, the above poses no problem at all. And if CSS were actually as efficient for this spec as framesets, surely some developers would have taken advantage of that by now. >Anything you can do with framesets (except resizing), you can do with iframes and CSS. Not resizing as you say, and see above. >However, there are lots of things you can do with iframes >and CSS that you cannot do with framesets. Which is an argument for iframes, but is /not/ an argument against framesets, which remain useful. >Framesets are a completely different language than HTML; Not a completely different language, just a different control. So what? >you cannot use framesets and any other content elements in the same document. No need in this case. >This means that you are forced to, for example, use a frame for the header of your page, >which may cause a scrollbar to appear if you don't allocate enough space, rather than just >putting the header in the page directly and using iframes to include the other pages. Not an issue for this use. Here's an application for framesets which is valid on previous versions of HTML, meets a need, is more efficient than known implemented alternatives for this use case, and does not suffer from any of the frameset deficiencies you have listed. Framesets remain useful, excluding them from HTML5 undermines support for those uses, and that weakens HTML5. PB -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20091014/2a585844/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 00:01:53 UTC