I really need help on something so simple

@chamesNov 14.2004

I just started useing frames a cupple weeks ago, and I need some help! I have 3 frames on my page that are in coums but the text allways is in the center of the frame and not at the top! How do i get the text to stay at the top of the frame insted of all ways going into the center.

to post a comment

HTML

41 Comments(s) _↴

@ray326Nov 14.2004 — #If you've only been using frames for a couple of weeks then maybe you can stop cold turkey now with little or no withdrawal.

@BonRougeNov 14.2004 — #I think Ray's trying to say that most people are actually moving away from frames and trying to use pure css to present their pages. CSS can do what frames do and a lot more. Maybe you should give up trying to fix your frames while you still can and learn css.

Good luck.

(Ray - sorry if I misinterpreted you)

@pawkyNov 14.2004 — #BonRouge, im sure you interpreted him right. However, instead of just saying dont use frames it would be best to explain why not to. This will give him more of a way to 'decide' on his own.

Reasons frames arent as good:

1. it prevents the user from being able to bookmark a page

2. it hurts your page in SEO (search engine optimization)



3. some do use frames because they believe that it speeds the site up a lot for navigation. It really doesnt that much if you make the site with full CSS. the key to speed is a properly laid out site.

4. u may not think there is another way to get the same appearance. You can achieve the same appearance using pure CSS and you dont get the negative parts of using frames. Only thing is the whole page has to load as if you werent using frames (but remember, speed lies in the site being designed well).

those are the main reasons why not to use frames. It is now up to you to decide what you want to do. Personally, I would go with CSS because it is a LOT easier to learn. I originally learned all the improper code and it was confusing (well, i understood it, but looking back now, its a mess!) using CSS makes making a site so much easier and updates are not a problem. ?

@chamesauthorNov 16.2004 — #thx for your help guys

Ill try to find a place that i can learn css

does anyone know any? tell me

@BonRougeNov 16.2004 — #[URL=http://www.w3schools.com/css/default.asp]w3schools[/URL]

@ray326Nov 16.2004 — #http://www.westciv.com/style_master/academy/css_tutorial/index.html

@chamesauthorNov 17.2004 — #Well i want something that is free

@ray326Nov 17.2004 — #The information is free. That's what you need.

@chamesauthorNov 17.2004 — #Ya i saw that after i posted that message

Thanks for you help though

@JoshNov 18.2004 — #Don't let these guys run you off just because they disapprove of the way you design [b]your[/b] site.

If your frameset looks something like...

[code=php]
 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Frameset//EN"
 "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-frameset.dtd">
 
 <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en-US">
 <head>
 <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
 
  <title>Frameset</title>
 </head>
 
 <frameset cols="*,*,*">
 <frame name="leftcol" src="leftpage.html" />
 <frame name="centercol" src="centerpage.html" />
 <frame name="rightcol" src="rightpage.html" />
 </frameset>
 </html>
 [/code]

Then your problem lies within your framed pages (leftpage.html, centerpage.html, rightpage.html). It would help to see what you have.

@Ben_RogersNov 18.2004 — #<rant>I'd appreciate it if you were to disregard Josh's post, Chames. What we are telling you is [i]not[/i] a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact: frames are wrong for presenting your page, for the reasons Pawky has listed. Everything they do can be acheived in another way, and while Josh may think we are merely saying what we [i]think[/i] is right, we are actually telling you the right way to go.</rant>

@Paul_JrNov 18.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Ben R. [/i]

[B]<rant>I'd appreciate it if you were to disregard Josh's post, Chames. What we are telling you is [i]not[/i] a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact: frames are wrong for presenting your page, for the reasons Pawky has listed. Everything they do can be acheived in another way, and while Josh may think we are merely saying what we [i]think[/i] is right, we are actually telling you the right way to go.</rant> [/B][/QUOTE]
Not really. They may be unfriendly, ugly, and the mark of an amateur, they aren't necessarily "wrong". Using tables for layout is wrong, because that isn't what tables are meant to do; you can only do with frames what you are meant to do with them, hence, you can't really be "wrong" in using them. Supposedly, frames can be accessible, but I've yet to see a site that implemented frames in an accessible manner.

@Ben_RogersNov 19.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Paul Jr [/i]

[B]Not really. They may be unfriendly, ugly, and the mark of an amateur, they aren't necessarily "wrong". Using tables for layout is wrong, because that isn't what tables are meant to do; you can only do with frames what you are meant to do with them, hence, you can't really be "wrong" in using them. Supposedly, frames can be accessible, but I've yet to see a site that implemented frames in an accessible manner. [/B][/QUOTE] They are wrong to use on the world wide web. They do nothing that can't be accomplished in a better way, and also have many negative effects. Therefore, they are [i]wrong[/i].

@Paul_JrNov 19.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Ben R. [/i]

[B]They are wrong to use on the world wide web. They do nothing that can't be accomplished in a better way, and also have many negative effects. Therefore, they are [i]wrong[/i]. [/B][/QUOTE]
Tell that to the W3C. :rolleyes:

@MstrBobNov 19.2004 — #The idea of frames isn't wrong, simply the implementation. It presented a number of usability problems. The W3C has a project, an XML application with the functionality of Frames, but fewer usability issues. [URL=http://www.w3.org/TR/xframes/]XFrames[/URL]. However, you'd have to be using an XHTML document, and there is not proper browser support.

Frames are, as was stated, just plain [I]fugly[/I]. They are used almost predominantly by newcomers to webdesign, and thus have been associated as a sign of a newbie. Too often, they are abused as a way to layout a webpage instead of CSS. There are some times on the web where frames are neccessary, such as in different web applications (like in a webshell), but generally are unfriendly even to visitors in modern graphical browsers (like Firefox, Opera, and even IE). Unless you deem it absolutely insurmountable to overcome Frames, try very much to avoid them.

@Paul_JrNov 19.2004 — #Even the WCAG doesn't say to not use frames. It just says to use the [font=courier]noframes[/font] element and meaningful titles.

@Ben_RogersNov 19.2004 — #I'm not going by what the W3C says, I'm going by common sense. There's no reason to, and plenty not to use frames.

@Paul_JrNov 19.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Ben R. [/i]

[B]I'm not going by what the W3C says, I'm going by common sense. There's no reason to, and plenty not to use frames. [/B][/QUOTE]
That doesn't mean it's wrong to use them; it just means [i]you[/i] think it's wrong.

@Ben_RogersNov 19.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Paul Jr [/i]

[B]That doesn't mean it's wrong to use them; it just means [i]you[/i] think it's wrong. [/B][/QUOTE] Obviously if I said it in a non-sarcastic manner, then it's what I think. :p Also, prove me wrong, I beg you. Why would frames be right?

@JoshNov 21.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Ben R. [/i]

[B]<rant>I'd appreciate it if you were to disregard Josh's post, Chames. What we are telling you is [i]not[/i] a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact: frames are wrong for presenting your page, for the reasons Pawky has listed. Everything they do can be acheived in another way, and while Josh may think we are merely saying what we [i]think[/i] is right, we are actually telling you the right way to go.</rant> [/B][/QUOTE]

Not all implementations for the use of frames requires them to be viewed by the masses, or be indexed by Google. For instance [URL=http://www.phpbb.com]phpBB[/URL], the popular message board system uses a frameset for displaying their Admin section.

I don't know if you've ever written your own book or run your own company, but [URL=http://www.dmcinsights.com]Larry Ullman[/URL] does. He's the author of...
[list]

[*]PHP for the World Wide Web: Visual QuickStart Guide www.DMCInsights.com/php

[*]PHP Advanced for the World Wide Web: Visual QuickPro Guide www.DMCInsights.com/phpadv

[*]MySQL: Visual QuickStart Guide www.DMCInsights.com/mysql

[*]PHP and MySQL for Dynamic Web Sites: Visual QuickPro Guide www.DMCInsights.com/phpmysql

[*]PHP for the World Wide Web: Visual QuickStart Guide (2nd Edition) www.DMCInsights.com/phpvqs2

[*]Mac OS X Panther Timesaving Techniques for Dummies www.DMCInsights.com/mactst

[/list]
He uses a Frameset for his company [URL=http://www.dmcinsights.com]website[/URL].

@Ben_RogersNov 21.2004 — #If something is only viewed by administrators, and not all visitors, it's not technically part of the WWW, is it? You have a static, dependable audience. That means you aren't stuck with many limitations.

Good for him. Does he want a cookie? I don't really care about how his site looks. But, even though I doubt he cares, this is how people with text browsers, and the blind viewers accessing the site with an audio browser will view the site: [url=http://www.delorie.com/web/lynxview.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dmcinsights.com%2F]right here[/url]. Oh, yeah. A real beaut.

Anyways, are those webdesign books? Are they books on standards, or accessibility? *gasp* No! So, guess what- it has nothing to do with what we're talking about!!! Yes, he's a good with scripting? Does that make him a standards expert? No.

In summarization: BAH! :p

@JoshNov 21.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Ben R. [/i]

[B]I don't really care about how his site looks. But, even though I doubt he cares, this is how people with text browsers, and the blind viewers accessing the site with an audio browser will view the site: [url=http://www.delorie.com/web/lynxview.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dmcinsights.com%2F]right here[/url].[/B][/QUOTE]

I don't think many blind viewers will be reading his books.

[i]Originally posted by Ben R. [/i]

[B]standards, or accessibility? has nothing to do with what we're talking about!!![/B][/QUOTE]

Uh, Framesets are part of the W3C standards.

[i]Originally posted by Ben R. [/i]

[B]Yes, he's a good with scripting? Does that make him a standards expert? No.[/B][/QUOTE]

His books do emphasize conformance to XHTML 1.0 Transitional, but since you've already read them you know that.

@Ben_RogersNov 21.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Josh [/i]

[B]I don't think many blind viewers will be reading his books.

...

His books do emphasize conformance to XHTML 1.0 Transitional, but since you've already read them you know that. [/B][/QUOTE] You've listed a number of books on [i]programming[/i], no? Programming is server side. Code is client side. Two utterly seperate things. His writing books earn him no credibility in terms of accessibility: moot example. I don't care who's going to be reading his books, if it's on the web, all users should be able to access it. Simple as that. That's what the web is about ja- I mean, uh, Josh.
[i]Originally posted by Josh [/i]

[B]Uh, Framesets are part of the W3C standards. [/B][/QUOTE] What does that have to do with anything I've said in the post you were replying to?!?

@pawkyNov 21.2004 — #eh, this thread has gone far ? K, frames are not 'wrong' per say. Smart to use them at the time? probably not. Why? for the reasons i said. Now, frames are meant for the only thing you can use them for. So they cannot be used wrong as whoever it was that said it earlier ;P

also, noframes is a pain if you ask me. Really what that's saying is that you have to design the site twice if you want ppl to view it. If i am going to design it really nice without frames i might as well keep it that way ?

in conclusion:

frames 'wrong'? .:. no

frames a good concept? .:. yes, maybe the xframes that mstrbob mentioned will fix the bad parts of frames now, but its going to be a LONG time (IE ?)

better ways to achieve the same thing? .:. yes

@Ben_RogersNov 21.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by pawky [/i]

[B]frames 'wrong'? .:. no[/B][/QUOTE] They're either wrong or right. If you shouldn't use them, they are wrong. There may be some situations in which they are right, but not many. *shrug* I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

@chamesauthorNov 21.2004 — #Ok im getting a hint that frames are wrong I dont know where i got it from. Maby the 13 posts telling me they are wrong gave me a hint

@chamesauthorNov 21.2004 — #If i shouldn't use frames could i use tabbles insted? I really want this site to look cool

@Ben_RogersNov 21.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by chames [/i]

[B]If i shouldn't use frames could i use tabbles insted? I really want this site to look cool [/B][/QUOTE] What does using tables have to do with a site looking cool? [url=http://www.stopdesign.com/]Properly[/url] [url=http://www.1976design.com/blog/]coded[/url] [url=http://www.alazanto.org/]sites[/url] can [url=http://www.ryanbrill.com/]look[/url] [url=http://www.mezzoblue.com/]pretty[/url] [url=http://www.csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/136/136.css]spiffy[/url] too, you know.

@chamesauthorNov 21.2004 — #the last one was pritty "spiffy" as you put it

@Ben_RogersNov 21.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by chames [/i]

[B]the last one was pritty "spiffy" as you put it [/B][/QUOTE] The [url=http://www.csszengarden.com/]Garden[/url] has a lot of those. If you ever doubt that CSS can be used to create great looking sites...

@chamesauthorNov 23.2004 — #I now agree that css is better then frames and tables

@Ben_RogersNov 23.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by chames [/i]

[B]I now agree that css is better then frames and tables [/B][/QUOTE] ? As far as I'm concerned, in every which way. Better for both you [i]and[/i] your visitors.

@chamesauthorNov 23.2004 — #Does anyone realise how long this thred has gotten. lol longest one in the fourm

@Ben_RogersNov 23.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by chames [/i]

[B]Does anyone realise how long this thred has gotten. lol longest one in the fourm [/B][/QUOTE] No, it can't be. <http://www.webdeveloper.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=42418>, for one. 15 for two. :p

@chamesauthorNov 23.2004 — #Well i stand corrected, but this one is long

@chamesauthorNov 23.2004 — #if we keep talking like this it will be the longest though

@Ben_RogersNov 24.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by chames [/i]

[B]if we keep talking like this it will be the longest though [/B][/QUOTE] If we keep talking like this, it will be spammosity, and get closed within a page. ? The lounge is for the records- we got one up to 1000+, but it got closed. Long story.

@chamesauthorNov 24.2004 — #Why does your date say January 2004 when its only November?

@Paul_JrNov 24.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by chames [/i]

[B]Why does your date say January 2004 when its only November? [/B][/QUOTE]
That's when he registered an account at these forums.

@chamesauthorNov 24.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Paul Jr [/i]

[B]That's when he registered an account at these forums. [/B][/QUOTE]

Oh no-duh i should have knowen that. I feel so stuped

@chamesauthorNov 24.2004 — #Yaa he hit the seconed page? ? ? ?

lets keep going:p

Yaaa:rolleyes:

Also in #HTML _↴

Can you get me a link out of this code?Some Cribbing Problems Setting the background color on a frame

Success!

Help @chames spread the word by sharing this article on Twitter...

Tweet This

I really need help on something so simple

41 Comments(s) _↴

Also in #HTML _↴

Success!

Social

Version

I really need help on something so simple

41 Comments(s) ↴

Also in #HTML ↴

Success!

The web is an endless sea of information. Don't miss the boat... Subscribe!

Social

Version

41 Comments(s) _↴

Also in #HTML _↴