Problems with frames...

[Els]

Nope, he's been here a long time. I remember him from when I first
asked for sitechecks. First post I can find through Google is April 4,
2004

Oops, older even.
How about this one to demonstrate he doesn't change his mind very
often:
http://message-id.net/<[email protected]>

 

[Els]

Oops, older even.
How about this one to demonstrate he doesn't change his mind very
often:

And I got the wrong link there. Should be:
http://message-id.net/<[email protected]>#1/1

 

[rf]

month).

Nope, he's been here a long time. I remember him from when I first
asked for sitechecks. First post I can find through Google is April 4,
2004

Crikey, that long. I didn't notice.

And he is still sprouting all this bloody rubbish in support of frames?

Ah, typing that triggered a memory. Jake sprouts stuff in support of frames.
I ignore jake for a few weeks.

You check the archive ;-)
(on Google Groups, q=jake+gododdin+group:alt.html)

Nope. Now that you have corrected my mistake I actually don't care about our
friend jake. I'll just go back to ignore mode

Cheers
Richard.

 

[David Dorward]

Iframes work just fine in all modern browsers.

So? Support among slightly older browsers is worse, and they don't provide
any advantage over regular frames for the problem the OP is trying to
solve.

 

[jake]

Crikey, that long. I didn't notice.

And he is still sprouting all this bloody rubbish in support of frames?

Support of frames? Nope; I just like to keep things honest ;-)

(There's nothing like being 'fair and balanced' -- as one of the cable
news channels describes itself -- in order to see both sides of an
argument)

Ah, typing that triggered a memory. Jake sprouts stuff in support of frames.

Sorry, whatever you think about frames, they are just the best solution
to some specific requirements ....... )

I ignore jake for a few weeks.

I never ignore your comments, though; too much fun reading some of the
nonsense.

Anyway, where have you been for the last few months?

Nope. Now that you have corrected my mistake I actually don't care about our
friend jake. I'll just go back to ignore mode

Hey. Don't be a stranger.

 

[Neredbojias]

With neither quill nor qualm, Konrad Hammerer quothed:

Hi!

I've a question concerning frames. I want to use 3 frames:

1) Top
and Down and within Down,
2) Left and
3) Right


Top
-------------
|
Left | Right
|
|

Now my question:
In the left frame I have my Navigation Table, in the right frame I
have the content and in the top frame I have same kind of
Header-Information about the content frame. When I click on a link in
the left frame, I know how to change the right frame (with
target="right"), but this is not enough! I need to change also the top
frame, because the Header-Info must be updated and also the left
frame, because the navigation table may have changed!

How can I solve this problem? Is there a way without javascript?

You don't want frames, you want a page with a fixed-position left-
oriented nav menu. This can be done with css (although different
flavors are currently required for IE and other browsers.)

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

... for a well-written frames-based site.

Ah. Important words. "well-written." Very uncommon. The last dozens
of frame sites I looked at would not qualify.

Yes, jake, we know you adore frames. You stand in the minority in that.

 

[jake]

Ah. Important words. "well-written."

*Very* important words, indeed ;-)

Very uncommon.

Sadly, true.

The last dozens of frame sites I looked at would not qualify.

Agreed. (You just can't get the staff these days.)

But then again, pick a dozen sites at random and see how many of them
have no doctypes, HTML that won't validate, have accessibility problems
...........

Yes, jake, we know you adore frames. You stand in the minority in that.

Well, I don't use them, myself (if you exclude I-frames) -- but
certainly I have used them in 'the old days' for functionality that
frames are ideal for.

'Adore'? Too strong a word, surely ;-)

They have their uses -- it's just a pity there's so much disinformation
being published on NGs like this one ............

regards.

 

[Konrad Hammerer]

Exactly. My browser normally has a usable 450-500 pixels of height for

the content, on this 800x600px monitor. It is really annoying when some
web developer thinks I need to stare at his/her huge site logo all the
time I am trying to read the content in about a 250 pixel height area.

Get over it. Your logo is not nearly as important as your content.

See your point, but I find it much more annoying to search for the
navigation of the page and that is what I'm trying to do: HAVE THE
NAVIGATION IN VIEW ALL THE TIME. Not some logo stuff you mentioned...

 

[rf]

Konrad Hammerer wrote (with lack of attribution)

See your point, but I find it much more annoying to search for the
navigation of the page and that is what I'm trying to do: HAVE THE
NAVIGATION IN VIEW ALL THE TIME. Not some logo stuff you mentioned...

The navigation is almost *always* at the very top, or it should be. Simply
press [home]. No searching required. The navigation appears instantly.

Cheers
Richard.

 

[Konrad Hammerer]

in the right frame I

target="_top" (and build a new frameset document for each view).

Can you tell me how to do this? I tried to create a new frameset for
each view but how do I get rid of the "old" frameset which is set now?
My problem with created a new frameset for each view was that I got a
frameset in the frameset for each link...

Thanks,
Konrad

 

[David Dorward]

Can you tell me how to do this? I tried to create a new frameset for
each view but how do I get rid of the "old" frameset which is set now?

target="_top" on the link.

 

[dorayme]

See your point, but I find it much more annoying to search for the
navigation of the page and that is what I'm trying to do: HAVE THE
NAVIGATION IN VIEW ALL THE TIME. Not some logo stuff you mentioned...

The navigation is almost *always* at the very top, or it should be. Simply
press [home]. No searching required. The navigation appears instantly.

First, you give no argument for navigation being best at the
top. Second, you assume, falsely, that when someone wants to
look at the nav options he or she is ready to go where the nav
links point and not want to continue reading for the moment
where he or she was reading...

dorayme

 

[dorayme]

Can you tell me how to do this? I tried to create a new frameset for
each view but how do I get rid of the "old" frameset which is set now?
My problem with created a new frameset for each view was that I got a
frameset in the frameset for each link...

Thanks,
Konrad

You don't need to get rid of anything. Just make a frameset like
you want the target to look like (one in which all the frames
are changed) and target that frameset.

Let me suggest something I have done myself in this regard: if
you are going to do more of these major changes to the frameset
members, the frames, then create a folder called "framesets" and
keep all your framesets there. When you need a link in your
navigation to change just one frame, you use the construction:

<a href="../something.html" target="rightframe">A bit
different</a>

But when you want to do more than merely change one frame, use
the construction:

<a href="frames/frameset5.html" target="_top">Quite a bit
different</a>

Of course, you will know the best name to give these framesets
based on the context. For example, suppose you are making a
frameset for a section on cheeses. You could call it
"cheeseFrame.html". While folks stay within the cheese section,
they will use your frameset, your navigation then will just
change the content frame (using the first construction above).
But if they decide to move to the cakes section of you website,
which may need different navigation etc, you use the second
construction and maybe the frameset will be called
"cakeFrameset.html". The point about this is that it is easy to
get lost mentally, so pick some meaningful names and a
consistent manner of naming and filing.

dorayme

 

[Neredbojias]

With neither quill nor qualm, dorayme quothed:

You don't need to get rid of anything. Just make a frameset like
you want the target to look like (one in which all the frames
are changed) and target that frameset.

Let me suggest something I have done myself in this regard: if
you are going to do more of these major changes to the frameset
members, the frames, then create a folder called "framesets" and
keep all your framesets there. When you need a link in your
navigation to change just one frame, you use the construction:

<a href="../something.html" target="rightframe">A bit
different</a>

But when you want to do more than merely change one frame, use
the construction:

<a href="frames/frameset5.html" target="_top">Quite a bit
different</a>

Of course, you will know the best name to give these framesets
based on the context. For example, suppose you are making a
frameset for a section on cheeses. You could call it
"cheeseFrame.html". While folks stay within the cheese section,
they will use your frameset, your navigation then will just
change the content frame (using the first construction above).
But if they decide to move to the cakes section of you website,
which may need different navigation etc, you use the second
construction and maybe the frameset will be called
"cakeFrameset.html". The point about this is that it is easy to
get lost mentally, so pick some meaningful names and a
consistent manner of naming and filing.

Yeah, I know what you mean. Back in aught-one I was framed for stealing
some cheesecake and I've been mentally lost ever since.

 

[konrad]

I've tried this before and the result was, that the new frameset
appeared IN the "top" frame and the old frameset (so the two frames
"left" and "right") was not changed! So I had the old frameset as it
was with another frameset in the top frame???

How can I solve this?

Thanks,
Kornad

 

[konrad]

Now it worked...
Thanks!

Konrad