- From: Scott E. Preece <preece@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 11:26:43 -0500
- To: smishra@cc.gatech.edu
- CC: megazone@livingston.com, www-html@w3.org
From: Sunil Mishra <smishra@cc.gatech.edu> | | The entire frames idea is a presentation issue, and should be treated as | such. The structural markup is completely hidden away. There is no reason | why the <link> tag (in the head) along with stylesheets cannot give all the | functionality for a much smaller penalty, without adding any new tags. --- I agree that the bulk of the functionality could be represented as LINKs, if people were willing to standardize a few REL values, though the use of LINKs doesn't help at all with the bookmarking issue, assuming you care about bookmarking a multi-window configuration. I don't think these concerns fit well in the current scope of stylesheets - although perhaps they could be abstracted in an orthogonal LAYOUT specification mechanism. I have to disagree, though, with the notion that it is entirely a presentation issue. The collection of frames and frame contents and their interrelationships is very much a structural issue. I tend to think the right way to handle this is with a DTD for compound documents, which would allow an author to express the needed relationships and would also allow the browser to use the same notation to synthesize the current state of a compound document (what the pieces are at the moment and the locations within them) so that it could save it as a local file it could point a bookmark at. I don't think the current frames models are rich enough to be that notation. 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, 6 September 1996 12:28:50 UTC