On Tue, May 16, 2000 at 09:05:42AM -0700, pAb-032871 wrote:
[snip]
> RIGHT! But vertical scrolling can already do that. Why not
> have it write a whole frameset into a single HTML cache-file,
> and then render that? Yes, Lynx would have to ignore the multiple
[snip]
> corrupted or something]. With Lynx, it would be a lot simpler
> because you actually WANT to read it all as one document.
[snip]
I disagree. A frameset is a collection of documents, each of which
can generally stand alone. Using a GUI browser, if you click on a link
in one frame, it may very well load a new document in a *different*
frame, while leaving the rest of the frames alone. You no longer have
a document with a single URL that you can bookmark or send to someone
who you think might be interested.
If you put all of the frames in a single "cache-file", what do you do
when you follow a link? Split the cached document up and splice in the
new document? Replace the whole thing with the new document? What if
the link you followed was a menu frame, and the new document is a text
frame? Replacing the whole frameset with the new text document means
you no longer have the menu frame on the new page, but cutting and
splicing seems to be a lot of unnecessary complexity, and something
that would probably be very difficult to implement. I think the present
way of doing frames is as good as any. Personally, I think frames are
stupid, and hardly *ever* serve a useful purpose, even in graphic browsers.
Chuck
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
