<NOFRAMES>
This week, instead of focusing on what the frames we create will look like in Netscape Navigator 2.0/3.0 or Microsoft Internet Explorer 3.0, we're going to discuss what to do for the 12-15% of users with frames-incapable browsers.To see the examples this week, you'll need access to an older version of Navigator or Internet Explorer (or some other browser that doesn't handle frames). I generally flip back and forth between Navigator 3.0 and Explorer 2.0 on a Mac, or I run Netscape 1.22 on the PC across from me (my colleague and I design on Macs, but we test everything on a PC and a Unix box as well--a practice I highly recommend).
First, let's determine what our options are for dealing with the small but vocal minority of users stuck with frames-impaired browsers.
- Ignore them--reaching the 85% of users who can see frames is good enough.
- Tell them to upgrade to a frames-capable browser.
- Give them a stripped-down (designwise) page.
- Give them pages that visually approximate the frames pages, but that don't actually use frames.
Option 1 is what I saw everywhere when frames first became a possibility. I was still using Netscape 1.12 (Netscape 2.0 was too unstable on a Mac at that point), and I often came upon completely blank pages. I soon learned that this meant I was looking at a site with frames, and it was maddening to be "locked out." I think Option 1 is a poor choice in any case--but it was especially bad when less than 50% of users could see frames.
Options 2, 3, and 4 will require a
<NOFRAMES>specification. I personally think Option 2 is rude; I don't think it's fair to expect that everyone will have cutting-edge machines with the latest system software, lots of RAM, and the most recent beta version of the top browser. There's a bracket of users you want to cater to, and over time it creeps up like in the Range Finder game on the Price is Right. Eventually, you can expect that Mac II users with 9600-baud modems and Lynx will drop out of the bracket. Depending on the nature of your site, your bracket can be narrow or wide--but catering only to users at the upper limit is a quick way to alienate the rest of your visitors.Option 3 is a good one if there are only a few short pages that could be combined into one large page (as with the Thumper home page). Option 4 is much more complicated than Option 3, but it may be the only option if the framesets themselves are complex, with many files involved (as with the Developer's Forum).
To see a variation on Option 2, fire up your frames-impaired browser and have a look at version 4 of the Thumper page. You should see a notice that says "You need a frames-capable browser to see these pages." If you view the source, you'll see the following below the
<FRAMESET>:
<noframes> <html> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <center> <h2>You need a frames-capable browser to see these pages.</h2> </center> </body> </html> </noframes>[Incidentally, I went with the "rude" option in this case because the file (
thumper4.html) was intended to demonstrate frames, and I didn't want anyone with a frames-incapable browser to think that they were looking at frames when they weren't.]There are two ways to implement Option 3; the first is the method used in Option 2, and the second is the one used in Option 4. Since the Option 4 way can get quite complex, we'll save that discussion for next week. For now, let's assemble a simple no-frames version of the Thumper page.
First, we'll gather all the information contained in the frames version and assemble it into a plain HTML document (i.e., one without frames or tables). Next, we'll insert that entire document--from the
<html>to the</html>--between the<noframes> </noframes>tags in the filethumper4.html.The nice thing about this method--and you'll appreciate this when our files multiply in next week's demo--is that we are technically still working with the same number of files, and our directory/file structure is neat and easy to read.
The disadvantage is that you actually have two files to update. Whenever a band member calls to say that a show has been booked or cancelled, you'll have to make changes to both
tourdates.htmland to the shows area inthumper4.html--likewise, if the band were to add a keyboard player or release another album.To get around this problem, you could put only the Thumper logo and the options between the
<noframes> </noframes>tags, and link to the actualtourdates.html, info.html, album.html, andmembers.htmlfiles. This presents another problem, however; there would be no Thumper logo on those pages to help put them in context. The only way to get to the other pages on the site would be to use the browser's navigational buttons to either go back to the list of options and or to hop out again.Next week's method for creating a NOFRAMES page will solve both of these problems. But as you try to manage all the files, you may experience at least one panic attack. Start your yoga relaxation exercises now!
