HTML Frame Lock?

[xmp333@yahoo.com]

Hi,


I know the noresize attribute will keep the user from resizing a
frame, but is there a way to keep a frame from being resized by the
browser (in response to things like different layouts/sizes on the
page)?

Basically I want my frame sizes to remain fixed no matter what
happens.


Thanks!
Ahmed

[Alan J. Flavell]

Re: HTML Frame Lock?

On Fri, Aug 8, xmp333@yahoo.co m inscribed on the eternal scroll:
[color=blue]
> Basically I want my frame sizes to remain fixed no matter what
> happens.[/color]

Perhaps we should send you to the stores for a long stand.

[Barbara de Zoete]

Re: HTML Frame Lock?

> xmp333@yahoo.co m wrote:[color=blue]
> Basically I want my frame sizes to remain fixed no matter what
> happens.[/color]

Try publishing on paper. Problem solved.

--
Barbara

http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/index.html

[Sam Hughes]

Re: HTML Frame Lock?

xmp333@yahoo.co m wrote in news:4a0da86b.0 308081246.1cba1 859
@posting.google .com:
[color=blue]
> Hi,
>
> I know the noresize attribute will keep the user from resizing a
> frame, but is there a way to keep a frame from being resized by the
> browser (in response to things like different layouts/sizes on the
> page)?
>
> Basically I want my frame sizes to remain fixed no matter what
> happens.[/color]

That is a stupid idea. Do you really need frames?

Do your visitors also want your frame sizes to remain fixed?

What are you using them for?

If you are using frames for page layout purposes and you want the frame
non-resizable in order to keep your design intact, then you are using
frames for the wrong reason. The best solution would be to stop using
them. Don't have your page's layout so rigid. Remember, the World Wide
Web is the land of flexibility.

There are not many situations where frames benefit the user. The only
ones that I can think of off the top of my head are Google Groups (an
exceptionally good use of frames there), other uses of them in caching or
searching for images, and in web mail applications. (However, frames are
not necessarily beneficial in web mail; the best web mail user interface
I have seen is fastmail.fm's, which does not use frames.)

You can also use frames in a manner that benefits the user, if you also
do the following steps:

(1) Use it for a reason other than a menu on the left hand side of your
site.

(2) Allow the user to move their frame borders around.

(3) Allow the user to go without frames, to remove the frame and still
have the web site be fully functional.

(4) Provide <noframes> content for users who have their browsers set not
to use frames. They do exist, in larger numbers than you would expect.
(Think about users with mobile devices).

(5) Make sure that the user does not need to "jump through any hoops to
use your web site.

Many people think of the World Wide Web as a collection of web sites,
which have pages with links that point within the site and to other
sites. I think, however, that it is a good idea to look at the Web as
not a collection of web sites, but rather, a collection of individual web
pages. With most web sites, most people who visit will be looking for
information that is found on one specific page, or an article split up
into multiple files, rather than an entire site. Using frames
discourages this model of the World Wide Web, and it does not make
users' lives any easier.

[xmp333@yahoo.com]

Re: HTML Frame Lock?

> > Basically I want my frame sizes to remain fixed no matter what[color=blue][color=green]
> > happens.[/color]
>
> Doesn't using a fixed size in
> <frameset rows/cols
> not work for you??[/color]


No it doesn't. The frame comes up in the proper size, but sometimes
it gets resized by the browser.

[xmp333@yahoo.com]

Re: HTML Frame Lock?

> > Basically I want my frame sizes to remain fixed no matter what[color=blue][color=green]
> > happens.[/color]
>
> That is a stupid idea. Do you really need frames?
>
> Do your visitors also want your frame sizes to remain fixed?[/color]

This is what my employer wants, so it is my job to implement it
whether or not it is a good idea. I wouldn't mind abandoning frames;
I don't like frames. While they allow us to save on redundant coding
(we are using them for a menu), there are other ways to do this (I'm
thinking php).

We expect most of our visitors to be clients who are looking for
support, and as such we feel that they won't be picky about the layout
of the web site, as long as it is intuitive.


[color=blue]
> What are you using them for?[/color]

A left hand menu.


[color=blue]
> You can also use frames in a manner that benefits the user, if you also
> do the following steps:
>
> (1) Use it for a reason other than a menu on the left hand side of your
> site.[/color]

At this point I am considering alternatives to this. We have
collapsible menus, so there are a few options, but none of them are
terribly appealing. Java and JavaScript aren't viable alternatives
since people can up their security and effectively kill our means of
navigation, yet some level of dynamism would be nice. Again, I'm
strongly leaning towards php, but unless this gets approved I will
still need to find a way to lock the frames.


[color=blue]
> (3) Allow the user to go without frames, to remove the frame and still
> have the web site be fully functional.
>
> (4) Provide <noframes> content for users who have their browsers set not
> to use frames. They do exist, in larger numbers than you would expect.
> (Think about users with mobile devices).[/color]

This isn't a concern at all since we believe all our users will be on
frames capable browsers. We don't know of any users who are on mobile
devices. This is such a non-consideration that we have never had a
<noframes> content, nor do we intend to implement one as far as I
know.


[color=blue]
> (5) Make sure that the user does not need to "jump through any hoops to
> use your web site.[/color]

Knowing our platforms, we don't see this as an issue. We also see the
people who visit our web site as needing our services, so even if they
have to jump hoops, they will do so.


[color=blue]
> Many people think of the World Wide Web as a collection of web sites,
> which have pages with links that point within the site and to other
> sites. I think, however, that it is a good idea to look at the Web as
> not a collection of web sites, but rather, a collection of individual web
> pages. With most web sites, most people who visit will be looking for
> information that is found on one specific page, or an article split up
> into multiple files, rather than an entire site. Using frames
> discourages this model of the World Wide Web, and it does not make
> users' lives any easier.[/color]

Could you elaborate on this please?

Also, am I to take it that there is no way to lock the frame size?
Until such a time as I can convince management to approve a different
design for the site, I will have to try to lock the frames.


Thanks.

[Chris Morris]

Re: HTML Frame Lock?

xmp333@yahoo.co m writes:[color=blue][color=green]
> > That is a stupid idea. Do you really need frames?
> >
> > Do your visitors also want your frame sizes to remain fixed?[/color]
>
> This is what my employer wants, so it is my job to implement it
> whether or not it is a good idea. I wouldn't mind abandoning frames;
> I don't like frames. While they allow us to save on redundant coding
> (we are using them for a menu), there are other ways to do this (I'm
> thinking php).[/color]

What about a preprocessor?

http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Include_one_file_in_another

lists four preprocessors, which might be enough for your needs if
there's a problem with security or server load from PHP.
[color=blue]
> We expect most of our visitors to be clients who are looking for
> support, and as such we feel that they won't be picky about the layout
> of the web site, as long as it is intuitive.[/color]

Indeed. Having a frame too small for their needs would be
unintuitive, though?

It seems safe to assume that visitors wanting to resize the frames
will have good reason to do so, and other visitors won't. If you
don't think people will be picky about the layout, why be so concerned
about getting it to a particular exact setup?
[color=blue][color=green]
> > (4) Provide <noframes> content for users who have their browsers set not
> > to use frames. They do exist, in larger numbers than you would expect.
> > (Think about users with mobile devices).[/color]
>
> This isn't a concern at all since we believe all our users will be on
> frames capable browsers. We don't know of any users who are on mobile[/color]

Search engines aren't frames-capable. Your users may need to find the
site first.
[color=blue]
> devices. This is such a non-consideration that we have never had a
> <noframes> content, nor do we intend to implement one as far as I
> know.[/color]

You may believe all your users to be on frames-capable browsers - the
danger is that this will become self-fulfilling. You may also be in
breach of local anti-discrimination legislation by not providing
adequate alternatives to framed content.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > (5) Make sure that the user does not need to "jump through any hoops to
> > use your web site.[/color]
>
> Knowing our platforms, we don't see this as an issue. We also see the
> people who visit our web site as needing our services, so even if they
> have to jump hoops, they will do so.[/color]

Yes, but having been made to jump through hoops, will they recommend
you to others, or will they say "reasonable company, but their
website's a nightmare to use - try XXX instead".
[color=blue]
> Also, am I to take it that there is no way to lock the frame size?
> Until such a time as I can convince management to approve a different
> design for the site, I will have to try to lock the frames.[/color]

There is no reliable way to lock frame size. Any decent browser will
have an option to overrule any locking you do.

--
Chris

[xmp333@yahoo.com]

Re: HTML Frame Lock?

> What about a preprocessor?[color=blue]
> http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Incl...ile_in_another
> lists four preprocessors, which might be enough for your needs if
> there's a problem with security or server load from PHP.[/color]

That's what I was going to use PHP for. Even now we have some
standardized content that is preprocessed using PHP (on a workstation)
before being uploaded. This doesn't require server support nor does
it take any processing time. It has worked very well in the past and
so it is definitely near the top for the future. It also has the
added benefit of being easy for casual users to use; we have people
with no html coding experience (nor are they saavy computer users) who
generate web content this way and upload it on a regular basis.


[color=blue][color=green]
> > We expect most of our visitors to be clients who are looking for
> > support, and as such we feel that they won't be picky about the layout
> > of the web site, as long as it is intuitive.[/color]
>
> Indeed. Having a frame too small for their needs would be
> unintuitive, though?[/color]

Sort of. I think part of the text would be clipped, but the general
idea would still be intact.


[color=blue]
> It seems safe to assume that visitors wanting to resize the frames
> will have good reason to do so, and other visitors won't. If you
> don't think people will be picky about the layout, why be so concerned
> about getting it to a particular exact setup?[/color]

I think management doesn't like the way resizing looks. When the
frames change visibly in front of their eyes when they click on a
link, it looks unprofessional to them.

[color=blue][color=green]
> > This isn't a concern at all since we believe all our users will be on
> > frames capable browsers. We don't know of any users who are on mobile[/color]
>
> Search engines aren't frames-capable. Your users may need to find the
> site first.[/color]

Actually, the model we are operating on is one in which the users will
know our web site. While they can find us via search engines, the
VAST majority (if not all) will know us or get our site directly via
technical support.


[color=blue][color=green]
> > devices. This is such a non-consideration that we have never had a
> > <noframes> content, nor do we intend to implement one as far as I
> > know.[/color]
>
> You may believe all your users to be on frames-capable browsers - the
> danger is that this will become self-fulfilling. You may also be in
> breach of local anti-discrimination legislation by not providing
> adequate alternatives to framed content.[/color]

This may be true, but since this is the operating principle for us,
these are the parameters that I am going to work within. Given the
nature of our business and the role of our web site, I feel confident
in saying that our mobile client base is negligible at best.


[color=blue][color=green]
> > Knowing our platforms, we don't see this as an issue. We also see the
> > people who visit our web site as needing our services, so even if they
> > have to jump hoops, they will do so.[/color]
>
> Yes, but having been made to jump through hoops, will they recommend
> you to others, or will they say "reasonable company, but their
> website's a nightmare to use - try XXX instead".[/color]

That's the thing, the web site exists as a support tool -- it does not
exist for its own sake. The users will be our clients and given the
nature of this business, they won't go elsewhere if they don't like
our web site. Furthermore, a very large number would go to our web
site for tech support purposes, which means that a technical support
person will be online guiding them through the process.


[color=blue][color=green]
> > Also, am I to take it that there is no way to lock the frame size?
> > Until such a time as I can convince management to approve a different
> > design for the site, I will have to try to lock the frames.[/color]
>
> There is no reliable way to lock frame size. Any decent browser will
> have an option to overrule any locking you do.[/color]


Thanks -- that answers my question.



Thanks.