- From: Scott E. Preece <preece@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:28:17 -0600
- To: william@cs.columbia.edu
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
From: "William C. Cheng" <william@cs.columbia.edu> | | Are FRAMES becoming part of HTML3? Visually, it looks very nice in | Netscape, but the syntax looks quite ugly. The problem seems to be | that connected-frames is a UI and not a mark-up novelty. --- If stylesheets already existed it would make sense to make FRAME a BODY element, allowing multiple FRAMES and allowing them to occur anywhere, and put the layout specification in the HEAD (possibly in a stylesheet or possibly in a new LAYOUT element) . Actually, I'm not sure why they didn't just use TABLE as the layout mechanism, instead of introducing FRAMESET, but it was probably easier to implement if it was an either BODY or FRAMESET choice. The specification of the existence of FRAMEs, their initial contents, and their identities seems to me to be wholly a BODY concern - they define the contents of a single, aggregate resource. When frames get standardized, we can argue about the best way to represent document aggregation (actually, there's already been a fair amount of discussion); in the meantime, the Netscape implementation is providing some real experience to feed into the discussion. scott -- scott preece motorola/mcg urbana design center 1101 e. university, urbana, il 61801 phone: 217-384-8589 fax: 217-384-8550 internet mail: preece@urbana.mcd.mot.com
Received on Friday, 12 January 1996 14:28:20 UTC