Re: frames

At 12:31 p.m. 11/18/98 -0600, Laura Lynch wrote:
>Oddly,I found this article after doing a search for "frameset" on W3C's
>site:
>http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-script-960208.html
>If you scroll down to the "Compatibility with Netscape 2.0" section, you'll
>notice that they *do* acknowledge <FRAMESET> as an HTML Element.

Netscape 2.0 included frames, yes.

>Which I
>find rather odd and confusing, as they do *not* include it in any other
>reference to HTML 3.x that I could find.

Why is it odd?  Netscape 2.0 included frames, but Netscape 2.0 was
not HTML 3.2 compliant.

>This is why I design for browser
>compatibility, not W3C compliance.

I thought you said you designed for HTML 3.2?

In any case, designing for "browser compatability" instead of
W3C compliance is a real bad idea in the long run, as (a) it's
very short-sighted, and (b) you're always hitting a moving
target.

I urge everyone to learn the HTML standards and use them.

--
Kynn Bartlett  <kynn(at)idyllmtn.com>             http://www.idyllmtn.com/~kynn/
Chief Technologist & Co-Owner, Idyll Mountain Internet; Fullerton, California
Enroll now for web accessibility with HTML 4.0!   http://www.hwg.org/classes/
The voice of the future?   http://www.hwg.org/opcenter/w3c/voicebrowsers.html

HWG hwg-theory mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA