Re: HTML 4.0 review

> 2. A few corrections need to be made to what I earlier said regarding
> frames. The value of NAME is not an URL fragment; TARGET is a separate
> concept which allows a document or other resource, designated by an URL,
> to be loaded into a particular frame. Nevertheless, the general point is
> still valid: NAME is not really intended as a title that can be presented
> to the user, even though, as Lynx 2.7.1 demonstrates, it can be coopted
> for this purpose. Furthermore, the example of frames which is given in the
> HTML 4.0 draft highlights the fact that the resource referred to by SRC
> can be an image, in which case, there is no provision for ALT text, let
> alone a long description. In the absence of a metadata framework, it would
> appear that modification of the FRAME element is necessary. Frames can be
> nested, thereby realising quite complex visual structures, and the content
> of any frame can be changed whenever a link is activated. How can such
> functionality be conveniently transported into the braille or audio media? 
> How should an audio user agent render frames, and what implications does
> this have for markup considerations? Can it be said a priori that it would
> be best if each frame were labeled with a descriptive title, as proposed
> in my earlier message? 
 
I thought that TITLE was a valid attribute in FRAME since day one
(given it's part of the core %attrs set) but you're right it isn't!

Dave Raggett is following up with this issue on the HTML WG mailing
list.

Received on Monday, 15 September 1997 10:48:27 UTC