Re: Strange definition of Frame in Cougar DTD

At 12:23 PM 4/29/97 -0700, David Perrell wrote:
>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.

It is supposed to be used on pages WITHOUT frameset tags.  It prevents
frame-enabled browsers from displaying what is inside.  The main use for
this is to provide information to non-frame browsers that would be
duplicated in another frame on a frame-enabled browser, such as navigation
links or a banner.

--
Greg Marr
gregm@alum.wpi.edu
"We thought you were dead." 
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"

Received on Tuesday, 29 April 1997 15:45:44 UTC