Re: Using Frames

[Colin Moock]

Frame sites can be very cool and effective.


Now that that's said, here are a few things worth considering when

using frames:


1) Frames are not accessible to most people in the disabled community

(about 5-10% of the web, depending on your topic...). Alternative

browsers like pwWebspeak can't render frames.

(more info at:

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,23340,00.html?st.cn.nws.rl.ne

	and: http://www.webable.com/slides/dot/slide1.htm)


2) It can be tough to make a good site-map without some nifty

javascript. Because you won't have a different frameset for each of

your possible page states, then you'll only be able to link easily to

main framesets, not specific pages.


3) Frames sites are hard to bookmark. Users can only bookmark

framesets, not the pages as they are configured within framesets.


4) Frames sites generally require more overhead to maintain. For every

one .html file you might have on a non-frames site, you could have as

many as 3 files for a frames-site.


Just some items that have come into our decision making process in the

past...



Good luck,

Colin

flashershocker [dot] com

,Internet writes:

>Hi Flashers,


>	There has been alot of talk lately about whether to have a HTML site

>along with a Flash site, bandwidth etc. I was just wondering about

>frames. 


>How do the professional web developers on the list work out when to use

>frames? I'm asking this because my employers site is undergoing a major

>face lift and I'm trying to build a site that the majority of users can

>visit. I've started out using frames but find myself asking whether it

>is the right way to go.


>Marc


------------------------------------------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

email to

list-managershocker [dot] com

.  Problems to:

ownershocker [dot] com

N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to

list-managershocker [dot] com