- From: James Aylett <sja20@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 13:30:20 +0100 (BST)
- To: "Solko, Dave (SOLKODE)" <SOLKODE@exchange.uc.edu>
- Cc: "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>, "'galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl'" <galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl>
On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, Solko, Dave (SOLKODE) wrote:
> According to NS's own page on frames:
> <HTML> <HEAD> </HEAD> <FRAMESET> </FRAMESET> </HTML> So, I wouldn't
> recommend putting the <frameset> in the head.
>
> Also:
> "within the FRAMESET you can only have other nested FRAMESET tags,
> FRAME tags, or the NOFRAMES tag."
> and
> "A Frame-capable Internet client ignores all tags and data between
> start and end NOFRAMES tags."
>
> I inferred that they intended the FRAMESET to replace the BODY. And
> since BODY-contained elements can appear within the NOFRAMES element --
> for non-frame browsers, this too implies that the FRAMESET should exist
> outside the HEAD.
Yes - but for older browsers that might understand BODY tags with
extensions, eg:
<BODY BGCOLOUR="#555555"> ... </BODY>
you would lose this because they wouldn't pick this up from the <NOFRAMES>
tag. It makes more compatible code (although less sense, I agree) to have
the <BODY> tags available in the document for non frame-capable browsers.
James
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------\
James Aylett - Crystal Services (crystal.clare.cam.ac.uk): BBS, Ftp and Web
Clare College, Cambridge, CB2 1TL -- sja20@cam.ac.uk -- (0976) 212023
Received on Thursday, 27 June 1996 08:39:16 UTC