Re: A proposal for addition to HTML 3.0: Frames

From: Bert Bos <>
Date: 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
                 <>           Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
    <>     Postbus 716, NL-9700 AS GRONINGEN