regarding our website
scott.mitchell at mail.com
Sun Nov 18 15:34:52 GMT 2001
On Sun, Nov 18, 2001 at 11:07:27AM -0500, Future Beacon wrote:
> I see that I am not the only one who stronly objects to frames.
> It is an unnecessary feature. It seems very inappropriate for
> an OS that is not into excluding people and browsers around
> the world to assist its own devious market conditining.
> Shame on frames.
> Will the web site follow microsoft anywhere?
What's Microsoft got to do with it? AFAIK frames have been a standard part
of HTML for years now. Annoying and unnecessary? Sure, sometimes. But
not actually evil, I think... let's keep that for sites that *require*
Anyway, the UKUG site works fine in lynx, within the limits of its frames
support. Of course, there's no reason a text-only browser couldn't render
the frames the same way a graphical browser would, if it chose to.
By all means do away with the frames, but do it to make the site better
(easier navigation, more accessible, whatever), not because of some
religious objection to frames.
Scott Mitchell | PGP Key ID | "Eagles may soar, but weasels
Cambridge, England | 0x54B171B9 | don't get sucked into jet engines"
scott.mitchell at mail.com | 0xAA775B8B | -- Anon
More information about the Ukfreebsd