Frames or Tables

[Gatorajc]

Im still kind of new to web developing so I need a debate settled that I cant settle myself.

Some people I work said frames are a thing of the past not really used anymore. They say tables are the way to go. We all have designed sites for our individual parts of IT. All of our sites look a like. The only difference is I used frames. Mine I think actually looks better because certain things (links, graphics,etc) at the bottom of the page jump around (higher and lower on the page) thier page when on mine every page structure is the same. I believe what ever gets the job done don't reinvent the wheel. If it looks like it has a frame why not use a frame.

So my question is. To frame or not to frame and why?

 

[cian]

Hi,

I wouldn't say frames are a thing of the past, MANY sites still use frames. I have never used frames, always tables. Frames would really well and look good in certain situations.
The only thing i would say is LOADING TIME!

Oh, and remember not all browsers support frames.
For that metter some don't even support tables, but at least with tables all the content should be displayed anyway.(?)


É

http://www.endamcg.com/finland-gaa

 

[cian]

Sorry for the double posting, I kept getting an error!! :-(

É

http://www.endamcg.com/finland-gaa

 

[theocraticmind]

many people hate frames. honestly i don't understand it. ya, not all browsers suport frames. but even less browsers suport css, and that dosen't stop any of us. if your design calles from frames, i say go for it. just don't abuse them, it's easy for novice web disigners to kill frames. (i don't know if your novice or not, it was just a comment)

 

[surfergirl]

Overall I tend to steer away from them but some customers want it, need it, love it so they have to be used. However, I always leave the first page/index page non-frame and point it to the underlying frames, more work but ultimately more sensible. This gives gthe search engines something to chew. I also put a menu for the site on the bottom of each page within the frame so if it's somehow found in the searchengines without the frames the viewer can find the rest of the site.

 

[Julianne]

Although users with browsers that don't support frames are relatively rare these days, it's still wise to include some <noframes> content that will appear on your page if the frames don't. You can include anything you like and search engines may still pick up on keywords etc within the content.

http://www.leevalleylions.co.uk

 

[SPYDERIX]

I think frames are the way of the past now too. I have justy started using SSI and I love it. It is so much better. The only thing I think would be the best is to get SSI navbars to always be in the same spot when you scroll, the way frames do. NATE

http://www.spyderix-designz.com

 

[marcbrown]

I agree with SPYDERIX-
When I first started using HTML I thought it was a hideous way to design websites. In order to get the appearance right involved lots of &quot;work-arounds&quot;

CSS has eliminated this problem along with the need for frames. Maybe there's a use for frames here and there, but I wouldn't want someone to skip over my website based on load time or a search engine saying

&quot;... has frames which your browser doesn't support&quot;

I get that message on tons of searches with 4 different browsers even though they DO support frames;-)

 

[Gatorajc]

I understand why not to use them on a home page. Load time, search engines etc. But what if you have a site that has the same basic design through out. A banner with an image and a image on the side. Wouldn't using a frame instead of a css be better since the images would not have to be reloaded every single page. Just a thought. I have tended to avoid frames when possible but I always seem to have a problem having the pages look excactly alike,(they have to be due to company standard) mostly just images slightly off or hr bars just a little off, if I use something besides frames. AJ
I would lose my head if it wasn't attached.

 

[Wullie]

Gatorajc,

The pages do not have to be relaoded each time with frames, but on the other hand, they are being reloaded from cache when they are called on every other page anyway.

I personally cannot stand frames, never have done. Frames are ok if needed for a project that spiders will not encounter, eg: an intranet site but when you start implimenting them to the internet, you start to hit problems.

If all the layout is the same on every page, then you can use SSI to include a header and a footer. In the middle of those 2 includes, you put the content that is unique to that page.

This way, on each page all you have is the following:

<!--#include virtual=&quot;header.html&quot; -->
This is the unique content here.
<!--#include virtual=&quot;footer.html&quot; -->

When it comes to updating, this makes it simple to do and saves loads of time. The code is also a lot easier to read as it is in sections.

Hope this helps Wullie

sales@freshlookdesign.co.uk

http://www.freshlookdesign.co.uk

http://www.searchit-now.co.uk

 

[Gatorajc]

I will try those but how about something for the side. AJ
I would lose my head if it wasn't attached.

 

[TFfan]

I too think frames are the way of the past for the reasons mentioned above.