Re: A proposal for addition to HTML 3.0: Frames
||Bert Bos <email@example.com>
||Thu, 21 Sep 95 09:14:00 EDT
Glenn Adams writes:
|Unfortunately, your stab at a DTD doesn't correspond to the proposal
|as "framed" by Netscape. Namely, they use HTML instead of FRAMEDOC as
|the document element; they seem to permit only one FRAMEDOC in the
|modified HTML element (indeed more than one wouldn't make a lot of sense,
|at least in the context of using a single window -- it may make sense
|with multiple windows though); they have a NOFRAMES element which
|apparently takes %body.content as its content model; etc.
I know. It was a reaction to Chris Lilley's suggestion of creating a
separate DTD, with media type text/frame-doc instead of text/html. It
wouldn't need a NOFRAMES element then.
|I'd really like to see Netscape provide the necessary DTD fragment so
|they sign off on it formally.
Apparently they find it difficult and I don't mind spending 10 minutes
writing it. But I hope Netscape also takes a look at the ideas in my
other mail, I think their frames are too limited.
|By the way, while we're on this subject, Netscape should be advised that
|the EMBED tag cannot take arbitrary attributes and also maintain a coherent
|DTD. The HotJava folks made this mistake too and have since fixed it.
Bert Bos Alfa-informatica
<firstname.lastname@example.org> Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
<http://www.let.rug.nl/~bert/> Postbus 716, NL-9700 AS GRONINGEN