framed

[barret bonden]

A client of mine has a young man who has written a web app (a CRM in dot.net
1.1) using many frames .it looks good , but is hard to maintain, passing, as
it does, parameters from one frame to the next. These parameters allow the
synchronization of datagirds, leading to my technically naive question (as I've
only played with VS 2003 ) : are frames at all necessary in a web app ? It
seems to me that eliminating them would allow for the use of simpler
variables to synch the datagrids ..

 

[Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]]

You're right that frames can be difficult to use in ASP.NET. I try to avoid
them and I suggest you do too.
Usually you're better off using Master Pages or User controls to divide up
logical sections of a page. These approaches are far more maintainable.

 

[CMM]

Although I agree with both yours and Steve C.'s observations concerning
maintainability, Frames (properly implemented) still serve a very nice
purpose in terms of UI design... when the application must behave more like
a Desktop Application. How annoying would it be if everytime you scrolled a
message in outlook, your Folder Tree scrolled up and disappeared?

CRM apps are a good example of this. Some UI things are really only (easily)
possible using frames. For instance, in a CRM app your navigation shortcuts
are on the left side.... and you want them to ALWAYS be visible even if a
huge grid is loaded on the right.

You can replace frames using scrollable divs... but they introduce other
problems- such as hard-to-pin-down placement settings so as not to trigger
the browser's built-in scrollbars (which creates a highly confusing
user-unfriendly UI experience) and, of course, cross-browser compatibility
issues.

I think that, properly used and for certain applications, frames should not
be dismissed outright. At least not until the browser makers squash all the
anomolies with scrollable divs and abs placement quirks.

 

[Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]]

You've got some good points, but luckily AJAX has come along to solve most
of the problems you've mentioned.

Here's more info:
http://SteveOrr.net/articles/AJAX.aspx

 

[CMM]

I'm by no means an expert in AJAX (yet! ) but, I don't see what AJAX has
to do with window positioning and layout. For instance, Outlook Web Access
2003 would not have the UI that it does without frames. Check it out for
yourself.

I guess it would make *working* with frames easier? I don't know. But it
doesn't replace them (in the way scrollable divs promises to but has yet to
deliver on).

 

[Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]]

I must agree with you that there are some scrolling situations where I would
still consider using frames, but that's rare... I haven't had to use them
for years and that makes me happy.

AJAX allows pieces of the page to refresh independently of the page itself,
thus gaining the main performance efficiency that frames has to offer
without having to use frames.

 

[CMM]

I agree. My point was for web apps that must behave like desktop apps
(Outlook Web Access 2003 is a perfect example) with different scrolling
regions. For them, frames are still a necessity. I'm having to write one
right now... where desktop app experience is the main goal. After much
(much!) experimentation.... frames were the only solution.


--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com

I must agree with you that there are some scrolling situations where I
would still consider using frames, but that's rare... I haven't had to use
them for years and that makes me happy.

AJAX allows pieces of the page to refresh independently of the page
itself, thus gaining the main performance efficiency that frames has to
offer without having to use frames.