Re: A proposal for addition to HTML 3.0: Frames

Bert Bos says:

> I've been thinking about multi-pane layouts for document for some
> time, so I was very interested to see Netscape's proposal for
> frames. Unfortunately, it fell short of my expectations. The frames
> solve part of a problem, while making it harder to solve the rest.

I see frames, not as *a* multi-pane document but as an aggregating 
mechanism for compound documents or other media. This also seems to 
be how the Netscape proposal sees them.

> 2. Frames don't allow content in the same document in which the frames
> are being defined. This extra indirection is often unneeded and makes
> maintenance harder.

Which is why I suggested a new document type might be appropriate. If all 
the body content is disallowed, most of HTML has been removed anyway.

What did you think of my proposal, Bert?
 
> 6. The frames offer no obvious way for extension of the syntax, to
> allow other kinds of layout, such as paged or non-visual layouts.

True.  However, the point of aggregation is enhanced ergonomic visual 
display. For speech output, sequential "display" of the component 
documents is probably a better bet.

-- 
Chris Lilley, Technical Author
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
|       Manchester and North HPC Training & Education Centre        |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Computer Graphics Unit,             Email: Chris.Lilley@mcc.ac.uk |
| Manchester Computing Centre,        Voice: +44 161 275 6045       |
| Oxford Road, Manchester, UK.          Fax: +44 161 275 6040       |
| M13 9PL                            BioMOO: ChrisL                 |
|     URI: http://info.mcc.ac.uk/CGU/staff/lilley/lilley.html       | 
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

Follow-ups

• Bert Bos (bert@let.rug.nl)