Posted by Len Philpot on 12/29/05 15:19

In article <dp06f302b3a@news2.newsguy.com>, nospam@nohow.not says...
> I probably haven't heard all the arguments, but so far I'm
> not persuaded that frames are Satan incarnate. I don't use
> them, but I wouldn't be afraid to do so.

I'm kinda in the same position right now. It reminds me of the 'goto is
evil' arguments you hear. While I certainly don't advocate the careless
use of goto, it's a sharp tool and like all other tools, there is a
place to use it and a place to refrain from using it. You have to use it
without getting cut.

From what I've seen, I'd certainly avoid a site littered with numerous
frames, but there are offsetting factors such as making sure your
<noframes> tag is functional and offers access to the site, etc.

The SE issues are more difficult to avoid, but they're not as much of a
factor in what I'm going here. Still, I've not decided yet and would
like to look at the options. SSI looks like the best direction, if I
want to find a new host just for that.

From a design POV, I like sites in general that look and feel like a
piece of software rather than like a browser-oriented website (my
personal opinion is that while it's OK for web browsing, a web browser
makes for a terrible software interface). That's the direction I'd like
to head.

Thanks for the input.
--

-- Len Philpot -> len@philpot.org <--
------ ><> -----> http://philpot.org/ <--

[Back to original message]