Barbara said:
Well, new as in active, yes. But I've lurked here for about a year and a
half (as in some of the ciwa* groups and in ahc); how do you think I
learned all I use for my site?
How could you possibly lurk here for that long and not resist chirping in?
Bizarre
That is not really a good reason to skip the subject all together, is it?
Er, no. Er, yes. Er, what? Skip the subject? We are not skipping it. I am at
least vehemenantly arguing against it.
So I have noticed.
^^^^^^
I guess you're with the 'frames are evil' croud then?
Absolutely. Bloody bastards they are. Hate em. Same with the iframe
substitute of a vertically sized div with a scroll bar. Have you ever tried
to scroll such a page with your mouse wheel? Bloody annoying to say the
least :-(
If you have been lurking here then you surely know my stance on this. I
state it often enough.
What is wrong with a simple page that I can scroll my viewport up and down
upon. Why do authors insist on all sorts of Kewl things that *they* think
might be good for themselves, never thinking about how bloody hard they make
it for *me*, the viewer. Authors don't *use* a site. They write it. They
look at *bits* of it, to find the spelling errors. They never try to *use*
it because they know what is in it. They never try to read it from beginning
to end. I know, I fell into a similar trap once. I now stand back and read
word for word, aloud, every page I produce, as if I were a first time
viewer. This is alpha testing. Find the mistakes before it goes to beta or,
worse, to production.
I am aware of its history, but thanks for reminding me.
Just making sure. It pays to recount that history occasionally for the
newbies.
This group is not about the www.
Ah, yes, it is. There is an FAQ somewhere that says it is. All of the usenet
groups that have HTML or whatever in their name are about the web. Their
FAQ's state that as well.
Some of them specifically state that questions will be taken "in the context
of the web, unless stated otherwise". Surely you know that. How many times
have you seen a question blasted until the OP has bleated "it's for an
intranet", and then everybody says "you should have stated that up front,
you would have recieved entirely different answers"? I myself have typed
that phrase in many times during your year of lurking
is about HTML. HTML gets used in a
wide range of situations. I've seen office applications, html-based, that
couldn't have been developed without frames. Good applications, well
designed in all aspects I could think of, userfriendly, to be used only in
a very specific and enclosed environment by trained people. I think there
are situations where utilisation of frames is not only a legit thing to
do, it is the best option to choose :-D
Agreed. Indeed I have help systems written in HTML with frames that emulate
the windows help system. Contents on the left, content on the right but they
are *not* the web. They don't need to be bookmarked etc.
This stuff is not web.
If Miss Jacky had said "I am starting a new intranet help site" then your
argument would hold. She did not. She said "new web site". Frames have no
place on the web so, I suppose, all the above is OT
But that is just an opinion and has a value equal to other argumented
opinions.
Yep, and mine as well.
Crikey, it's time for another beer. See ya ;-)
