Posted by dorayme on 09/08/05 07:46

> From: Neredbojias <neredbojias@neredbojias.com>
>
> With neither quill nor qualm, dorayme quothed:
>
>>> It isn't that hard to "seat" a nav section at the top of a page, and re:
>>> IE, you can even do it without javascript if you have some server-side
>>> support.
>>>
>>
>> There is a lot of talk about the top of the page in frames
>> discussions. Frankly, I am not so keen to defend frames for this
>> but it is possible that a not very high top frame might be ok.
>> It is the side nav frame that can be useful and hard to match
>> without frames. Most monitors have more room in width and are
>> therefore more accommodating...
>
> A static left nav can be done with css, too. You must know css
> moderately well and be willing to experiment. At least 95% of what I've
> learned about html and the like came via experimentation. Most of the
> rest originated from here (esp. refinements of "experimental" results.)
>

Sure, but it means putting code on every page and again sure,
there are includes and php and stuff one can go into. But I
understood from the talk around here that frames were more
reliable than fixed positions over browsers, young and old...

I have to stress that the total argument between frames and non
frames is one thing. For example, I would be unlikely to make a
commercial site with frames again. But it is a different thing
to the fact of the easy advantages of some features of frames.
(I like updating and looking at the one site with frames on my
books, it is nice to operate and think through using the nav
system on the left and worrying mainly only about the simpler
code of the right content).

In my mild dispute with the good Mark Parnell, I have been
unable to get this point across. It is hard to get folk who are
convinced of the evil of frames in general to admit the
slightest thing about them on the positive side of the ledger.
To me, this is often a sign of a likely mistake in reasoning to
do with a confusion about the scope of the issue at hand. Let me
give you an example: I find I have nothing good to say about
some political or religious positions because they stink *on the
whole*. I am not inclined to see any strong or even mildly
reasonable points *for* the positions concerned. I am most
reluctant to concede the slightest thing, let alone encourage
them in the slightest. But in this, I am probably more
unreasonable than I should be!

dorayme

[Back to original message]