Alternative for framed site

L

Lauri Raittila

In practice it's not always possible to solve things the right way.

But it is alwasy possible to refuse doing things wrong way.
In this particular case the design was made by someone who hadn't the
slightest idea about accessability and usability.

So you made mistake in moment you said it would be possible.
It had taken months to create the design.

Hard to believe, but it is possible.
When I came in the customer was not prepared to listen to my arguments.

Then, why did you take the job?
In such case you can do two things:
a. Refuse to build the site
b. Try to find a solution with the minimum of disadvantages.
At that time I simply hadn't the skill and the time to do the latter. Even
now it seems to be not easy, even for the more experienced in this ng :)

So, you should have chosen first, or look for help.
 
S

Spartanicus

Nico Schuyt said:
Bookmarking of a framed site is difficult (IE can; FF returns to the start
page, no matter what you bookmark). Referring to a specific page is
impossible.

Not if you do a proper frame site (using a separate frameset for every
combination of frames).
 
N

Nico Schuyt

Not if you do a proper frame site (using a separate frameset for every
combination of frames).

I tried that once in combination with php (url like index.php?page=contact)
in combination with a snippet of php to use the same content for the page
itself as well as for the content of the noframes section.
IIRC the result was not so good: page transition not smooth.
But why should that be a better solution than an iframe??? IMO a page with
an iframe is easier to index for an SE than a framed site (both with
alternative text of course)
 
N

Nico Schuyt

Given the fact that the design was a fact *and* I waisted some time with
experimenting *and* even now it seems to be difficult to find a better
solution, I had to.
But it is alwasy possible to refuse doing things wrong way.

In real life things are realised by compromises :)
So you made mistake in moment you said it would be possible.
????????
Hard to believe, but it is possible.

Such things happen. I received this week the final text for an update of a
page while the first draft was sent to me in oktober last year.
Then, why did you take the job?

I didn't want to loose the job and was pretty sure I would find a better
solution later on. (not so sure anymore I must admit) Because there were no
changes requested since recently and no complaints, there was no need to
give it priority.
The upgrade of the site is free so the customer has no reason to complain I
think.
So, you should have chosen first, or look for help.

Hehehe, I *am* looking for help and after all the discussions we've had here
I doubt very much that two years ago someone was able to solve the problem.
 
L

Lauri Raittila

Hehehe, I *am* looking for help and after all the discussions we've had here
I doubt very much that two years ago someone was able to solve the problem.

There is very little difference here, I would think. The problem with
that site has nothig to do with technology (even if the very worst
possible is used), but the design, and especially not being able to bend
design. What I would do, is that I would make layout strech by content,
make those empty areas to go smaller when window is not big enaough etc.
 
T

Tonnie

Lauri said:
in alt.html, Nico Schuyt wrote:




There is very little difference here, I would think. The problem with
that site has nothig to do with technology (even if the very worst
possible is used), but the design, and especially not being able to bend
design. What I would do, is that I would make layout strech by content,
make those empty areas to go smaller when window is not big enaough etc.

Hi Lauri,

If you would try to stretch the design, isn't it bend?
 
T

Tonnie

Nico said:
Long long time ago I built a framed site: http://www.vleeskens.nl/ :)
The layout was designed in Corel Draw by someone else and I was not allowed
to change it. At that time I couldn't think of an an alternative for frames.
New atempt:
A (stable) layout with only div boxes seems to be impossible to make with
this layout.
On http://www.vleeskens.nl/p_basis2.htm an iframe is applied and some more
CSS. Could be an improvement but I don't like iframes.
On http://www.vleeskens.nl/p_div.htm a design using a table in combination
with a scrollable div. A snippet of javascript is used to make it scrollable
in Mozilla based browsers. Result looks good in IE but in FireFox it
collapses and in Opera it's bad: The content div has no height.

The problem could be solved if I knew how to assign a height: 90% to a div
in a table with height: 100%.
Anyone an idea how to realize that?

Hi Nico,

Your problem would still exist. What about a visitor that sees the page
in a viewport less 800x600, or even in then but using a larger font?

Convince your client to let go of the idea of total control and use the
background colors to stretch the page.

Groet,

Tonnie
 
D

dorayme

From: "the idiot said:
Newsgroups: alt.html
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:31:25 -0000
Subject: Re: Alternative for framed site



and so they will have to use their mouse to scroll/drag it down... crikey.
the temerity.


I am watching this conversation with great interest. It seems to me a
fantastic idea to design so that no *browser* scroll bars appear because all
that the designer wants to display initially readily appears. The bit (say a
div somewhere) that has tons of info can be scrolled (via local scroll bar)
without the rest (containing all sorts of handy things like navigation)
going away. I am disappointed that it has so many problems (works fine on my
machines and I am always impressed when designs do it well. Tho I am yet to
brave it in my own designs. I have just one old biggish site using frames
(it is old and this feature has never been changed tho it is much updated),
very simple left nav that stays fixed and is just so damned useful. I know I
should be rid of frames by now, but I still am searching for some excellent
alternative where the nav does not go away)

So far, I am cheering for The Idiot. My point? Simple really, now that you
know I am watching, please think carefully and produce your best arguments
so that it will help me make up my mind...

dorayme

Please spare remarks like: "Oh yeah? And who the F*** are you?" and stuff
like that... won't do you any good :)
 
N

Nico Schuyt


Hoi Tonnie!
Your problem would still exist. What about a visitor that sees the
page in a viewport less 800x600, or even in then but using a larger
font?

Well, the http://www.vleeskens.nl/p_div.htm was initially very promising (at
least in IE). I've just put some images and text in it:
http://www.vleeskens.nl/pp_div.htm and it looks fine in any window size and
font-size.
Even now I'm not fully convinced it couldn't be done. The trics Lauri
supplied solved it for Opera. Only the problem with the width in Mozilla
remains. (and the (minor?) problem with keyboard navigation of course)
BTW Not so long ago even an expert like David Dorward (being asked for a CSS
alternative for iframes) pointed to
http://www.beforethedog.com/tutoriali/tut1.htm :)
Convince your client to let go of the idea of total control and use
the background colors to stretch the page.

OK, I might end up in that discussion again :) Just wanted to be sure
there's really no way to create a proper site based on the given design.
 
S

Spartanicus

Nico Schuyt said:
I tried that once in combination with php (url like index.php?page=contact)
in combination with a snippet of php to use the same content for the page
itself as well as for the content of the noframes section.
IIRC the result was not so good: page transition not smooth.

Page transition "smoothness" is a browser property, Gecko based browsers
are particularly easy on the eye, Opera for example is more twitchy. The
same page transition behaviour happens on non framed sites, I see no
reason to mark this as a drawback of loading a new frameset.
But why should that be a better solution than an iframe???

IIRC normal frames are supported better by browsers, keyboard
navigation, screen readers etc.
IMO a page with
an iframe is easier to index for an SE than a framed site (both with
alternative text of course)

If a SE does not support iframes and the all embedded content is also
used as content in the iframe element then the link listed by the SE
will point to the right page. If a SE does support iframes, the same
problem as with normal frames occurs. This can be solved by server side
redirection IIRC.
 
N

Nico Schuyt

Spartanicus said:
"Nico Schuyt" wrote:
Page transition "smoothness" is a browser property, Gecko based
browsers are particularly easy on the eye, Opera for example is more
twitchy. The same page transition behaviour happens on non framed
sites, I see no reason to mark this as a drawback of loading a new
frameset.
IIRC normal frames are supported better by browsers, keyboard
navigation, screen readers etc.
If a SE does not support iframes and the all embedded content is also
used as content in the iframe element then the link listed by the SE
will point to the right page. If a SE does support iframes, the same
problem as with normal frames occurs. This can be solved by server
side redirection IIRC.

OK, thanks a lot so far Spartanicus!
 
L

Lauri Raittila

Lauri Raittila wrote:
There is very little difference here, I would think. The problem [is]
the design, and especially not being able to bend
design. What I would do, is that I would make layout strech by content,
make those empty areas to go smaller when window is not big enaough etc.
If you would try to stretch the design, isn't it bend?

Exactly. Your point? Plonk.
 
L

Lauri Raittila

Of course, in fact I am pretty sure I could make it work in hour or 2
(took me 2 minutes to find fix for opera...). If you really want that,
contact by email and I look it out. (It won't be free, I don't do stuff
that makes no sence for free.)
Yes.

Well, the http://www.vleeskens.nl/p_div.htm was initially very promising (at

What you don't seem to get is that no matter what way you do it, it is
bad idea. I lost my interest on overflow and fixed positioning year or
more ago, as I understood that they don't usually solve any problem, but
create more problems.
OK, I might end up in that discussion again :) Just wanted to be sure
there's really no way to create a proper site based on the given design.

There is no way. There propably is way to make it look same as current on
IE6, FF1 and Opera 7-8, but that is irrelevant. It is not proper site
that way either.
 
K

kchayka

the said:
and so they will have to use their mouse to scroll/drag it down... crikey.

You are forgetting about keyboard users. They can have a much harder
time with scrolling divs than mousewheeel users. I bet that in IE, a
keyboard user can't scroll them at all.
 
K

kchayka

the said:
on my versions of ff and opera i can
use the mousewheel to scroll. i think with opera i first had to actually
left click the page though

If you have to use a mouse to focus or scroll the content, it is
inaccessible to keyboard users, no?
 
T

Tonnie

Lauri said:
Lauri Raittila wrote:
There is very little difference here, I would think. The problem [is]
the design, and especially not being able to bend
design. What I would do, is that I would make layout strech by content,
make those empty areas to go smaller when window is not big enaough etc.

If you would try to stretch the design, isn't it bend?


Exactly. Your point? Plonk.

A bad temper Lauri?

And i thought those Finish guys were ice cold.
 
T

Tonnie

Nico said:
Tonnie wrote:

OK, I might end up in that discussion again :) Just wanted to be sure
there's really no way to create a proper site based on the given design.

Hi Nico,

I'm sorry but you will have to.
 
N

Nico Schuyt

Lauri said:
in alt.html, Nico Schuyt wrote:
Of course, in fact I am pretty sure I could make it work in hour or 2
(took me 2 minutes to find fix for opera...). If you really want that,
contact by email and I look it out. (It won't be free, I don't do
stuff that makes no sence for free.)

<grin>But Lauri! Im shocked! You seem to be prepared to give up all your
principles for some money and help me building a site based on an invalid
design. Even I, as commercial site builder, have problems with it :0
I shall help you to resist the temptation of getting rich with such evil
activities and will *not* email you. said:
What you don't seem to get is that no matter what way you do it, it is
bad idea.

Aarrgggh, you do me wrong. Even though it was one of my first websites and I
was very unexperienced, I immediately informed the designer and the customer
about the disadvantages and suggested an alternative but, see the original
posting, '... I was not allowed to change it ..' Sometimes in life you have
to choose between bad and not ideal.
And even though it's about the worst combination of design and technique you
can think of, the damage seem to be less than expected. In all that time
there was no complaint from any visitor. The customer even got compliments
about his site :)
I lost my interest on overflow and fixed positioning year or
more ago, as I understood that they don't usually solve any problem,
but create more problems.

I think (hope) scrollable divs will be better implemented in browsers in the
future. They can be of great help.
About the fixed positioning I agree with you. Sometimes however a technique
as described in http://devnull.tagsoup.com/fixed/ can be invaluable. Think
for instance of a shopping cart that has always to be in sight of the
visitor.

Hey, no hard feelings I hope? It's just a discussion to see where the bounds
are of what is possible/practical/acceptable.
Thanks for your help!
 
L

Lauri Raittila

<grin>But Lauri! Im shocked! You seem to be prepared to give up all your
principles for some money and help me building a site based on an invalid
design.

No, I have no princibles on what comes to making designs for
demonstration. As far as I won't be responcible for putting them in use.
It would be nice exercise of futility.
Aarrgggh, you do me wrong. Even though it was one of my first websites and I
was very unexperienced, I immediately informed the designer and the customer
about the disadvantages and suggested an alternative but, see the original
posting, '... I was not allowed to change it ..' Sometimes in life you have
to choose between bad and not ideal.

Of course, you would have needed to have good arguments, and actually
show few/2 different end results, and as which they like best. The framed
version might have been one of those. I think they would have come to
sences after you had pointed out all problems in the framed one.
And even though it's about the worst combination of design and technique you
can think of, the damage seem to be less than expected. In all that time
there was no complaint from any visitor. The customer even got compliments
about his site :)

People won't complain, they go elsewhere. After all, if designers can't
design simple webpage, how can they do a house. There is plenty of award
winning architechts everywhere that can't build anything useful.
I think (hope) scrollable divs will be better implemented in browsers in the
future. They can be of great help.

Well, I don't think the support of them is problem, but the consept.
There are few exeptions, like the table thing.
About the fixed positioning I agree with you. Sometimes however a technique
as described in http://devnull.tagsoup.com/fixed/ can be invaluable. Think
for instance of a shopping cart that has always to be in sight of the
visitor.

Which is very annoying. Why would I need to see that fucking shopping
cart all the time? After all, it won't tell me anything useful, and if it
does tell, if takes too big part of my screen.
 
T

the idiot

dorayme said:
I am watching this conversation with great interest. It seems to me a
fantastic idea to design so that no *browser* scroll bars appear because all
that the designer wants to display initially readily appears. The bit (say a
div somewhere) that has tons of info can be scrolled (via local scroll bar)
without the rest (containing all sorts of handy things like navigation)
going away. I am disappointed that it has so many problems (works fine on my
machines and I am always impressed when designs do it well. Tho I am yet to
brave it in my own designs. I have just one old biggish site using frames
(it is old and this feature has never been changed tho it is much updated),
very simple left nav that stays fixed and is just so damned useful. I know I
should be rid of frames by now, but I still am searching for some excellent
alternative where the nav does not go away)

So far, I am cheering for The Idiot. My point? Simple really, now that you
know I am watching, please think carefully and produce your best arguments
so that it will help me make up my mind...

dorayme
hurrah for me... though im not very good at concise arguments...
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,483
Members
44,902
Latest member
Elena68X5

Latest Threads

Top