On Wed, 09 May 2001 10:15:24 -0500, Todd Denniston wrote:
>Ok, I will tone down my hatred for forms for just a _few_ minutes.
>1. it is _slightly_ more dificult to grab a the link to send someone a link
>to a specific page because the page you are looking at is not the link shown
>in the "location" bar of your GUI browser.
Yes, slightly. Not any big thing.
>2. If you do send someone a link to a specific page, and they go directly to
>it vs navigating the frames it will look different than what the orginating
>person was looking at:
>http://lesstif.sourceforge.net/download.html
>vs
>http://lesstif.sourceforge.net/frames.html ->Downloads ->Download Page
Yes.
But actually a "modern website" has usually those very long,
non human-readable URLs. We would still do better.
Also the idea/proposal is that we just re-used our existing pages, just
remove the logo from each and put it into a frame.
>3. It is very anoying when you go from one site (with frames) to another
>groups site and still have the frames from the first place.
>http://lesstif.sourceforge.net/frames.html ->Downloads ->CD-ROM vendors
>->Debian
This could be changed for external links!?
>4. I have seen very few frames sites which will not confuse the browser when
>printing.
?
Actually I _never_ tried to print out something from our website.
If you need good printout of HTML try htmldoc or better tools ...
>Note: I do use Netscape Comunicator almost exclusivly so some (but not all) of
>this may be caused by the specific browser.
>
>Sorry Alexander.
>Please at least always provide a frames free set as well, it keeps people like
>me less anoying. :)
As mentioned you will/would always have an alternative.
But even two votes against so far don't make me really think
my approach is soooo bad ...
---
Alexander Mai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
