Re: Strange definition of Frame in Cougar DTD

Masayasu Ishikawa wrote:
> So, Cougar specification of Frame is not compatible to those of
> Netscape Navigator or Microsoft Internet Explorer ... frame documents
> that use NOFRAMES *inside* FRAMESET (this is current practice) are
> invalid for Cougar?
> BODY contents *outside* NOFRAMES is also rendered in frame-capable
> user agent? Where? If not, I can't understand the role of NOFRAMES ...
> --
> Masayasu Ishikawa

Navigator and Internet Explorer both ignore a BODY element following a
FRAMESET. So the Cougar specification is compatible with these browsers.

NOFRAMES is meant to be used inside the BODY of a frame document, not
inside the BODY of the framset document.

Received on Tuesday, 29 April 1997 12:45:22 UTC