Bergamot wrote:

> That's not really any different from my preprocessor includes, except
> they're not php.
>
And you don't have to pre-process...

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Bergamot wrote:
> Petr Vileta wrote:
>> Jonathan N. Little wrote:
>>>
>>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...il&btnG=Search
>>> why frames are evil - Google Search
>>
>> Yes, I know it, but original question was be about "How to do for
>> frames" ;-)
>
> If you asked how you could shoot yourself in the foot, don't you think
> we'd rather talk you out of it than provide step-by-step instructions?
>
Maybe my English is too bad but I don't understand what you wanted to say.
Somebody asked a solution for frame style pages and I wrote my ideas. What I
did wrong?
--
Petr Vileta, Czech republic
(My server rejects all messages from Yahoo and Hotmail. Send me your
mail from another non-spammer site please.)

Please reply to <petr AT practisoft DOT cz>

Jonathan N. Little wrote:
> Again with my favorite
> analogy, why would a lumberjack cling to his ax after the development
> of the chainsaw?
I don't know any lumberjack and don't know why he prefer to use ax instead of
chainsaw :-) Maybe he want to have well-developed body, maybe he don't like
roaring noise, maybe he don't have money to buy gasoline.
But back to IT world. Maybe author of question not have access to use server
side solution, maybe he not have knowledge to do it, maybe a pages are too
simple to solve it in other way then frames.
--
Petr Vileta, Czech republic
(My server rejects all messages from Yahoo and Hotmail. Send me your
mail from another non-spammer site please.)

Please reply to <petr AT practisoft DOT cz>

Petr Vileta wrote:

> But back to IT world. Maybe author of question not have access to use
> server side solution,

Server side was rare and expensive in 1990s not common and cheap

> maybe he not have knowledge to do it,

Tutorials up the "wazoo"


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...ls&btnG=Search
php tutorials - Google Search

> maybe a
> pages are too simple to solve it in other way then frames.

<frameset cols = "25%,*">
<frame src ="menu.htm" />
<frame src ="content.htm" />
</frameset>

vs

<?php include_once('menu.htm'); ?>
<div id="content">
<p>This page's content....






--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

"Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@central.net> writes:
> Chris Morris wrote:
> > "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@central.net> writes:
> > That said, if you're only doing a bit of templating to replace
> > frames, an offline preprocessor is probably a better way to make
> > the site. PHP would be like using a chainsaw to chop through a
> > twig, and about as safe.
>
> If we have a 1/2 dozen pages maybe, but every time you make a change
> an edit your have to re-preprocess and upload the entire site gets old
> really fast.

Perhaps. The 'make' command comes in very useful. Set up the
dependencies, only rebuild the changed pages, and then automatically
move the new pages into place. The largest site I've maintained by
preprocessing had a few hundred pages and was easy enough to do.

--
Chris

Petr Vileta wrote:
> Bergamot wrote:
>>
>> If you asked how you could shoot yourself in the foot, don't you think
>> we'd rather talk you out of it than provide step-by-step instructions?
>>
> Maybe my English is too bad but I don't understand what you wanted to say.

Sorry. "Shoot yourself in the foot" means you are doing something bad to
yourself.

The point is that this is a discussion group, not a desk. If
somebody posts a question about how to do something that we consider a
bad practice, most of the regular posters here would rather tell them
why it is bad and show them better solutions instead of giving the
answer they wanted to hear.

> Somebody asked a solution for frame style pages and I wrote my ideas.

We don't want to encourage frames. There are almost always better ways
to do whatever the poster wants to do.

--
Berg

dorayme wrote:

> I just love how folks fail to address the fact that frames keeps the
> menu from scrolling away in a natural manner. You can't simply say use
> includes and walk away!
>

That old argument it getting really tired. It is predicated that you do
not have any options when in fact it can be accomplished if you wish
with CSS and position: fixed. Even MS lets IE7 now supports this and
hopefully IE6 will go the way of the Dodo. And as will any styling is
should and does degrade gracefully for IE6, it just remains static, no
harm no foul.

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta http-equiv="content-language" content="en-us">
<title>No Frames</title>

<style type="text/css">
html, body { margin: 0; padding: 0; }
ul#nav {
margin: 3em 0; padding: 0; list-style: none;
background: #fcf; width: 5.5em; position: fixed;
}

ul#nav li {padding: .2em 1em; }
div#content {
margin: 1em 1em 1em 6em;
position: absolute; top: 0;
}

</style>

</head>
<body>
<ul id="nav">
<li>foo</li>
<li>bar</li>
<li>baz</li>
</ul>
<div id="content">
<h1>Frames Should Die</h1>
<p>Can be done without frames</p>
<p>
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit...

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Petr Vileta wrote:
> > maybe a pages are too simple to solve it in other way then frames.

Jonathan N. Little <lws4art@central.net> wrote:
> <frameset cols = "25%,*">
> <frame src ="menu.htm" />
> <frame src ="content.htm" />
> </frameset>

Don't forget the noframes content. And to make your content bookmarkable,
you'll need multiple frameset documents. And watch out for orphaned content
pages. And all your menu documents (and possibly some of your content
documents) will need to target their links. And so on.

> vs
>
> <?php include_once('menu.htm'); ?>
> <div id="content">
> <p>This page's content....

Authors who want the menu links to stay in place while the content scrolls
will also need a style sheet, but the markup for that can be put in a
common include file.
--
Darin McGrew, mcgrew@stanfordalumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, darin@html.com, http://www.HTML.com/

"Warning: Dates in the calendar are closer than they appear."