loading/unloading frames <span class="votesInfo" data-xf-init="tooltip" title="1 member likes this thread!" >1

http://www.jeffemminger.com

jemminger · Jun 2, 2005

CliveC,

how is targeting a new frameset supposed to load two frames when one link is clicked, without using javascript?

-jeff

try { succeed(); } catch(E) { tryAgain(); } finally { rtfm(); }
i like your sleeves...they're real big

adam0101 · Jun 2, 2005

In your main document, include:

Code:

<FRAMESET rows="59,*" cols="99%" frameborder="0">
  <FRAME name="titlebar" src="header.html">
  <FRAME name="main" src="mainFrameset.html">
</FRAMESET>

Then, in a new document called "mainFrameset.html" include:

Code:

<FRAMESET cols="190,99%" rows="*" frameborder="0">
  <FRAME src="leftbar.html" name="leftbar" noresize>
  <FRAME src="rightbar.html" name="rightbar" noresize>
</FRAMESET>

Finally include target="main" in your links:

Code:

<a href="newPage.html" target="main">

You can load the left and right frames again using:

Code:

<a href="mainFrameset.html" target="main">

Adam

adam0101 · Jun 2, 2005

CliveC, I have to question your solution too. Are you suggesting that the easiest way is to create a new frameset for each page you want to load? I'd have to disagree.

Adam

ChrisHirst · Jun 2, 2005

if you want to be search engine friendly you could use the Self Referencing Frameset

Chris.

Indifference will be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
Woo Hoo! the cobblers kids get new shoes.
People Counting Systems

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

CliveC · Jun 2, 2005

The best solution depends a lot on what the application does. If it starts with 3 frames but subsequently only has two then adam's is a good solution.

The problem arises if you subsequently want to target one or more of the two bottom frames.

By reloading a new frameset (target="_top") you may have a similar header frame but with links appropriate to the frameset within which the header is contained.

The only extra overhead is reloading the header frame, which might be necessary anyway.

It is always helpful if the originator posts some code.

Clive

CliveC · Jun 2, 2005

It is always helpful if the originator posts some code.

Sorry, I was thinking of another thread.

Clive

CliveC · Jun 2, 2005

jemminger, I was not ignoring your post, I was just uncertain what it meant.

Clive

http://game-master.us/phpx-3.4.0/

jstreich · Jun 2, 2005

The problem is that frames and JS are both the spawns of satan. There has to be an easier way to o whatever it is your trying to accomplish -- unless what your trying to accomplish is scaring away your visitors. The problems with frames has been ranted about many times before, please read some of my earlier frame and/or JS rants before considering either solution presented. Given the choice, creating different framesets is the way to go for several reasons:

If I turn off JS, I can't use your page.
JS links aren't spidered by Google and other engines.
JS is EVIL.

[plug=shameless]

[/plug]

CliveC · Jun 2, 2005

Code:

The problems with frames has been ranted about many times before

Unfortunately, the soulutions haven't.
There is a solution for every frame problem that has ever been presented in this forum.

Frames are not an instument of Satan, they are just another tool that may or may not be appropriate for the task at hand.

Clive

http://game-master.us/phpx-3.4.0/

jstreich · Jun 2, 2005

<flameProofSuit>
Problems with frames:
1.) People, in the general public, think frames are evil because the past abuse. Using frames risks losing vistors over silly reasons. Solution: ignore vistor preference for developers, as web developers oft' do.
2.) Lynx and most other text browsers don't render frames, instead the user us given the noframes text (if the site designer did a good job and gave all the content in the noframes all is well, if not the user has to go to the pages seperatly and has a hard time navigating because navagation frame is seperate from the content frame -- you lose more vistors).
Solution: post signs say "require XYZ latest browser" and call anyone who happens to use a text based/speaking/mobile browser a loon in the minority whose visit (and money) we obviously don't need or want.
3.) Most fram problems are inereint in the want for a frame. In this respect the solution to all "frame problems" is to abondon them.
Solution: Use a frame.
</flameProofSuit>

[plug=shameless]

[/plug]

jemminger · Jun 2, 2005

jstreich,

i agree that frames are lame, but #2: who the fsck these days is using a text-only browser?

-jeff

http://www.jeffemminger.com

try { succeed(); } catch(E) { tryAgain(); } finally { rtfm(); }
i like your sleeves...they're real big

jstreich · Jun 2, 2005

i agree that frames are lame, but #2: who the fsck these days is using a text-only browser?

Old linux fogies, cellphone webbrowsers, other mobile technology, visually impaired people who use spaking browsers and spiders (well if you can call the last two of them "text only" -- although it is true that both have an easier time with things that display well in a textonly browser).

[plug=shameless]

http://game-master.us/phpx-3.4.0/

[/plug]

CliveC · Jun 2, 2005

jstreich, these problems have been discussed before.

1. The general public would not necessarily know whether they were in a frameset or not.

2. A noframes tag should refer to a link (usually the navigation frame) which would not be a problem at all.

Framesets are perfect for handheld and noframe devices. Read faq215-5692.

Clive