Giggle Girl a écrit :
Hi there,
I am having a problem with the behavior of Firefox, where lefthand
column content is not resized properly after it is "collapsed" and then
"re-expanded". An online demo is available here:
http://s161149005.onlinehome.us/DEMOS/FF/RESIZE_PROB/main/frameset.asp
It works fine in IE 6, but in Firefox, it is broken. Specifically,
when the page/frameset first loads in either browser, it looks correct.
But when you click the "yellow minimizer" (see demo) and the column
collapses, and then click the "expander", the table layout in Firefox
becomes compressed.
I am not sure if this is an "onresize" problem (since the "onload"
sizing works), or if it is an HTML problem (where Firefox does not like
tables with 100% width when the holding frame size changes), or
something else I cannot think of.
BUT! I appreciate any and all help.
If I can get the behavior of this example to act the same in IE as
Firefox, I would be a happy camper.
This will become a web application, and only has to work in recent
versions of IE and Firefox.
Thanks,
Ann
I forgot the obvious. Just by setting your left frame with
border="4"
and by removing the noresize attribute, you would make your left frame
and frameset design accessible in case javascript support is disabled or
inexistent, and that is not to say also more flexible, user-friendly for
your visitors. Users dislike sites that over-constrain and over-control
them. Why make complex and javascript-driven when simple and not
dependent on javascript can be done?
Your top-most frame has 0 rows: obviously, there are lots of things that
you do in that webpage that I would not even consider doing. I would
first of all get rid of all the frames.
"
Frames introduced several usability problem that caused several
commentators to advise Web site builders to avoid them at all costs.
Examples of such usability problems are:
1- * The [back] button works unintuitively in many cases.
2- * You cannot bookmark a collection of documents in a frameset.
3- * If you do a [reload], the result may be different to what you had.
4- * [page up] and [page down] are often hard to do.
5- * You can get trapped in a frameset.
6- * Searching finds HTML pages, not Framed pages, so search results
usually give you pages without the navigation context that they were
intended to be in.
7- * Since you can't content negotiatiate, noframes markup is
necessary for user agents that don't support frames. However, almost no
one produces noframes content, and so it ruins Web searches, since
search engines are examples of user agents that do not support frames.
8- * There are security problems caused by the fact that it is not
visible to the user when different frames come from different sources.
"
All taken from XFrames
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xframes-20020806/#s_intro
9- The fact that the content frame is without navigation makes such
document incoherent when isolated. The fact that the navigation frame is
without an explicit reference to content makes such document illogical
when isolated, when taken out of context. When you load a frameset, if
one of the 2 framed-documents has a loading problem of some sort, then
it affects the usage of both documents.
10- There are also copyright infringment issues: with frames, it is
possible to display someone else's site into one's own without his/her
prior formal approval. Linking to other sites within a frameset can pose
some legal problems. "frame-spoofing (a web site inserting content into
a frame that appears to be from another site)"
11-
"Interface Design
Frames promote poor interface design. If you have all your navigation in
its own frame, how do you account for users who come from other places?
Keep in mind the example above, search engines can bring a user right
into the guts of your site. It is easy to forget that people can make
their way in to the HTML page of a frame, and when they do, how do you
plan to allow them to get to your home page? Or how do you indicate to
the user that it is your site? These are all questions that should be
answered before the design is even begun since supporting them requires
some trade-offs in the overall site layout. Most navigation frames do
not indicate the current page. (...) "
- Search engines have problems with frames:
Here's what google.com says about frames:
Google Information for Webmasters
"
My webpages have never been included in the Google index.
2. My site's been live for a few months.
(...)
It's also possible that we're not able to crawl your site due to
technical reasons. A few of the most common ones are listed below:
(...)
* Your pages use frames. Google supports frames to the extent
that we can. Frames tend to cause problems with search engines,
bookmarks, emailing links and so on, because frames don't fit the
conceptual model of the web (every page corresponds to a single URL). If
a user's query matches the page as a whole, Google returns the frame
set. If a user's query matches an individual frame on the page, Google
returns the URL for that frame. The page is not displayed in a frame
because there may be no frame set corresponding to that URL.
(...)
"
taken from Google Information for Webmasters
http://www.google.com/webmasters/2.html
Meta-resource
Why are frames so evil? (this page has 12 links/resources on the issue)
http://html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
Why Frames Suck (Most of the Time)
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9612.html
Problems with using frames
http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Problems_with_using_frames
Gérard
