what % of users can see frames?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Derek Clarkson, Jan 14, 2004.

  1. Hi Andrew,
    I can't say that frames are evil, but they do tend to polarise web masters.
    My opinion is that like the much maligned GOTO statement, they have their
    place and understanding where that is is the key. For example, I used
    frames on my old site because my ISP could not provide me with any server
    scripting support. So frames where the only way I could construct a site
    without repeating the core content on every single document. Obviously a
    maintenance headache.

    However if you web server does have scripting support then I would suggest
    avoiding frames for many of the reasons supplied by other people. My own
    preference for the type of layouts that frames provide is to use sever side
    scripting and CSS to control the position of the relevant data. CSS
    positioning is still very much in flux as many browsers tend to implement
    things slightly differently, but over all I find it easy to work with.

    Hope this helps.

    --
    cio
    Derek
     
    Derek Clarkson, Jan 14, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Hi all -

    I am interested in building a simple site that 90%+ of web users can view.
    If I use frames, will I disqualify a substantial number of users? Are there
    still people out there using browsers that don't support frames?

    Thanks for your help.

    Best,
    A
     
    ANDREW MITCHELL, Jan 15, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Derek Clarkson

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:TuoNb.14389$>
    "ANDREW MITCHELL" <> said:

    > I am interested in building a simple site that 90%+ of web users can view.
    > If I use frames,


    don't use frames!

    http://html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
    http://homepage.ntlworld.com/l_vajzovic/tom/web/frames.html
    http://www.karlcore.com/articles/article.php?id=2
    http://david.us-lot.org/www/frames/

    > will I disqualify a substantial number of users?


    frame support isn't really an issue if you do them properly but by their
    very nature they're rarely a method worth considering implementing.

    --
    brucie - i usenet nude
     
    brucie, Jan 15, 2004
    #3
  4. Derek Clarkson

    Mark Parnell Guest

    On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:16:51 GMT, "ANDREW MITCHELL"
    <> declared in alt.html:

    > Hi all -
    >
    > I am interested in building a simple site that 90%+ of web users can view.


    Why not 100%?

    > If I use frames, will I disqualify a substantial number of users? Are there
    > still people out there using browsers that don't support frames?


    That's irrelevant.
    http://html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
    http://homepage.ntlworld.com/l_vajzovic/tom/web/frames.html
    http://dorward.me.uk/www/frames/

    >
    > Thanks for your help.


    No worries.

    --
    Mark Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
     
    Mark Parnell, Jan 15, 2004
    #4
  5. Derek Clarkson

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:>
    Derek Clarkson <> said:

    > ISP could not provide me with any server scripting support So frames
    > where the only way I could construct a site without repeating the
    > core content on every single document.


    you could have used preprocessing. a much better and easier solution
    than frames.

    --
    brucie - i usenet nude
     
    brucie, Jan 15, 2004
    #5
  6. Derek Clarkson

    mscir Guest

    Would you explain this further? I have about 29k of javascript menu I'd
    like to avoid loading for each and every page. Suggested reading/url?

    brucie wrote:

    > in post: <news:>
    > Derek Clarkson <> said:
    >
    >
    >>ISP could not provide me with any server scripting support So frames
    >>where the only way I could construct a site without repeating the
    >>core content on every single document.

    >
    >
    > you could have used preprocessing. a much better and easier solution
    > than frames.
    >
     
    mscir, Jan 15, 2004
    #6
  7. Derek Clarkson

    Mark Parnell Guest

    On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:22:56 -0800, mscir <>
    declared in alt.html:

    > Would you explain this further? I have about 29k of javascript menu I'd
    > like to avoid loading for each and every page. Suggested reading/url?
    >


    In that case, put your javascript in a separate file, and link to it
    from each page.

    <script src="yourfile.js" type="text/javascript"></script>

    --
    Mark Parnell
    http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
     
    Mark Parnell, Jan 15, 2004
    #7
  8. Derek Clarkson

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:>
    mscir <> said:

    >>>ISP could not provide me with any server scripting support So frames
    >>>where the only way I could construct a site without repeating the
    >>>core content on every single document.


    >> you could have used preprocessing. a much better and easier solution
    >> than frames.


    > Would you explain this further?


    http://allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Include_one_file_in_another

    > I have about 29k of javascript menu


    thats about how large you page should be /in total/ not just a menu

    > I'd like to avoid loading for each and every page.


    then use a frame although i would rethink the menu


    --
    brucie - i usenet nude
     
    brucie, Jan 15, 2004
    #8
  9. In article mscir wrote:

    [brucie:preprocessor]

    > Would you explain this further?


    Preprosessor is tool that you can use in your home machine, it ads stuff
    automatically according to some rules. I haven't used any publicly
    available, so I can't comment them. But preprosessing saves huge times,
    and you are server independent (but somewhat preprosessor dependent ;-).

    > I have about 29k of javascript menu I'd
    > like to avoid loading for each and every page. Suggested reading/url?


    Hm. 29k javascript menu is likely to be bigger problem than most frames.
    Frames are just very annoying to use to most people, js menu might not
    work at all and it is propably hard to use as well. Try using it whiout
    mouse, for example. Of course there is exeptions, where it might make
    sence, but I have never seen one used then...

    (of course you can use external js file, it will be cached.)

    --
    Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
    Saapi lähettää meiliä, jos aihe ei liity ryhmään, tai on yksityinen
    tjsp., mutta älä lähetä samaa viestiä meilitse ja ryhmään.
     
    Lauri Raittila, Jan 15, 2004
    #9
  10. Derek Clarkson

    mscir Guest

    Re: what % of users can see frames?... Caching js menu question

    Looking for a way to avoid frames but still keep my 29k js menu...
    google found this:

    ========================================================================

    http://www.javascriptkit.com/javatutors/efficientjs.shtml

    Tip 2: Cache your scripts!

    You've "cashed in" your objects...another way to enhance script
    performance is the cache the entire script, by including it in a .js
    file. The technique causes the browser to load the script in question
    only once, and recall it from cache should the page be reloaded or
    revisited.

    <script src="imagescript.js"></script>

    Use script caching when a script is extremely large, or embedded across
    multiple pages.

    ========================================================================

    Is this right? After a javascript menu is downloaded once (2 .js files),
    it will be loaded from the cache (local memory) every time the user
    loads a page that uses that menu?

    Are there cache size limitations, such that downloading a large image
    from one page will replace the menu code in the cache, forcing it to be
    downloaded again?

    Thanks,
    Mike


    brucie wrote:
    > in post: <news:>
    > Derek Clarkson <> said:
    >
    >
    >>ISP could not provide me with any server scripting support So frames
    >>where the only way I could construct a site without repeating the
    >>core content on every single document.

    >
    >
    > you could have used preprocessing. a much better and easier solution
    > than frames.
    >
     
    mscir, Jan 15, 2004
    #10
  11. Derek Clarkson

    brucie Guest

    Re: what % of users can see frames?... Caching js menu question

    in post: <news:>
    mscir <> said:

    > Looking for a way to avoid frames but still keep my 29k js menu...


    what for? a lot of people will have left before your menu even finishes
    downloading.

    please don't toppost

    How am I supposed to post my replies in a newsgroup?:
    http://allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post

    --
    brucie - i usenet nude
     
    brucie, Jan 15, 2004
    #11
  12. Derek Clarkson

    rf Guest

    "ANDREW MITCHELL" <> wrote in message
    news:TuoNb.14389$...
    > Hi all -
    >
    > I am interested in building a simple site that 90%+ of web users can view.
    > If I use frames, will I disqualify a substantial number of users? Are

    there
    > still people out there using browsers that don't support frames?


    Over at my house 100% of myself can see frames with 80% of my browsers. Lynx
    is the odd one out.

    However over at my house 100% of myself are royally pissed off with sites
    that use frames. They are usually so badly done as to be a pain in the arse
    to use. Even when they are well done the site is still quite hard to use,
    obscuring content and so on.

    Give me a single continuous page anyday.

    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Jan 15, 2004
    #12
  13. Derek Clarkson

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <TuoNb.14389$>,
    says...
    > I am interested in building a simple site that 90%+ of web users can view.


    Then make it work in IE and you have done it.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Jan 15, 2004
    #13
  14. Derek Clarkson

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > I can't say that frames are evil, but they do tend to polarise web masters.
    > My opinion is that like the much maligned GOTO statement, they have their
    > place and understanding where that is is the key....


    This is probably the BEST, description of frames I have seen! Of
    course, the description could also be extended to Javascript, Flash,
    Multimedia. etc....

    Each has its place on the Web. The problem is people in this forum tend
    to disagree where that place it. (And it is a moving target)

    But never the less, great description!

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Jan 15, 2004
    #14
  15. Derek Clarkson

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <TuoNb.14389$>,
    says...
    > I am interested in building a simple site that 90%+ of web users can view...


    You do know, the answer to this question really does depend on the
    content you are providing, and who you are providing it to. Is this a
    regional web site (say a real estate site) and entertainment site (say a
    tribute site to a game, movie or person) A personal page? A kids page?

    All of these factors are involved in making your decision.

    YMMV
    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Jan 15, 2004
    #15
  16. Derek Clarkson

    rf Guest

    "mscir" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Would you explain this further? I have about 29k of javascript menu I'd
    > like to avoid loading for each and every page. Suggested reading/url?


    Oh My &Deity;. 29K of javascript?

    Delete the whole bloody thing and put in a simple HTML menu.

    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Jan 15, 2004
    #16
  17. Whitecrest wrote:

    >[Frames, JS, Flash]
    >Each has its place on the Web. The problem is people in this forum tend
    >to disagree where that place it. (And it is a moving target)


    It doesn't matter where that place is, as long as it's far away from me.

    SCNR
    Micha
     
    Michael Fesser, Jan 15, 2004
    #17
  18. Derek Clarkson

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > >[Frames, JS, Flash]
    > >Each has its place on the Web. The problem is people in this forum tend
    > >to disagree where that place it. (And it is a moving target)

    > It doesn't matter where that place is, as long as it's far away from me.


    And it is a good thing that the web is so big that we can both have
    exactly what we want.
    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Jan 16, 2004
    #18
    1. Advertising

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

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?U2FtMjAwMA==?=

    Can Mac Users With safari browser see the site with ASP.net

    =?Utf-8?B?U2FtMjAwMA==?=, Jul 22, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,627
    Juan T. Llibre
    Jul 22, 2005
  2. Flip
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    985
    Tony Morris
    Feb 9, 2004
  3. Steve Kershaw
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    373
    Brennan Stehling
    Sep 26, 2006
  4. Bernie Beattie

    WebParts - can you transfer one users choice to all users?

    Bernie Beattie, Sep 6, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net Web Controls
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    151
    Bernie Beattie
    Sep 6, 2006
  5. Wilmer Hernandez
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    470
    Wilmer Hernandez
    Aug 20, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page