- From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 12:23:56 -0700
- To: <www-html@w3.org>, "Masayasu Ishikawa" <mimasa@vega.aichi-u.ac.jp>
Masayasu Ishikawa wrote: > BODY contents *outside* NOFRAMES is also rendered in frame-capable > user agent? No. 1) BODY contents outside FRAMESET _is_not_ rendered in frame-capable browsers 2) BODY contents outside FRAMESET _is_ rendered in non-frames browsers 3) non-frames browsers haven't got a clue as to what NOFRAMES means > ...I can't understand the role of NOFRAMES ... Nor I. And as far as I know, NS has never expressed their motivation. Is it NOFRAMES or NOFRAME? Netscape's own documentation (<http://developer.netscape.com/library/documentation/htmlguid/frames.ht m>) has it both ways. I have seen some pages on Netscape's site with NOFRAMES inside the FRAMESET and others with NOFRAMES outside the FRAMESET and one with a NOFRAME tag. They all work. So does simply putting the BODY outside the FRAMESET and not using the NOFRAMES tag at all. Unless someone can give a good reason for its existence, NOFRAMES/NOFRAME should be kept out of a formal spec. There's no reason to remove it from existing pages, but there's no reason to add it to new ones, either. Authors can simply use the BODY element following the outer FRAMESET element and everything works fine with existing browsers. David Perrell
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 1997 15:30:21 UTC