I.
I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
bottom.
How can I block direct access to the frames' urls ?
For example, http://..../index.html should work but not http://..../top.html.
Can I use an HTML code which redirects to index.html if frame's url is
typed ?
Or should I use .htaccess file ?
THanks for help.
On Apr 16, 5:25 pm, Overnight
> I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
> bottom.
> How can I block direct access to the frames' urls ?
You probably won't have to worry. If you are building a site with the
frame layout mentioned above you will probably not be bothered with a
lot of visitors. At least not ones that will ever come back.
> THanks for help.
No problem
In article
<1b5610bc-02df-48a7-b129-c1fa4e8c83e0@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Overnight
> I.
>
> I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
> bottom.
>
> How can I block direct access to the frames' urls ?
>
> For example, http://..../index.html should work but not http://..../top.html.
>
> Can I use an HTML code which redirects to index.html if frame's url is
> typed ?
> Or should I use .htaccess file ?
>
None of these things. If you want to keep the flickeringly deadums
frames technology alive, there are two ways at least to go:
Have a prominent link on each of the frames to the effect that if
someone lands on it in isolation and is not seeing the others (you
describe or put an intelligent mini pic to give the idea, to go to
index.
Have separate framesets for each page and only use links to these
framesets in your navigation.
As you ponder these workarounds, you might conclude that they rather
take the edge off the the advantages of this frames technology.
--
dorayme
In article
<7adaa3fa-ce5c-412f-b96a-2d9fe575da3c@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Travis Newbury
> On Apr 16, 5:25 pm, Overnight
> > I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
> > bottom.
> > How can I block direct access to the frames' urls ?
>
> You probably won't have to worry. If you are building a site with the
> frame layout mentioned above you will probably not be bothered with a
> lot of visitors. At least not ones that will ever come back.
>
You cannot know this at all. You would be gambling with your money to
bet on it, relying only on that if anyone used frames these days, they
are likely to be new and less than competent, their lack of experience
and judgement reverberating into all the areas that are relevant to
attracting visitors.
Here is something, Travis, from me to you, for you to misunderstand. I
like and succeed in being badly misunderstood.
The Obscure One.
--
dorayme
Overnight wrote:
> I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
> bottom.
The obligatory posting:
http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
Frames were invented by Netscape about a hundred years ago; they used
them for about six months, then dumped them. Klew?
I hate scrolling half-a-page. Use server-side includes instead, and
present one page.
> THanks for help.
You're very welcome.
--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Vista
On Apr 16, 6:12 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
> Frames were invented by Netscape about a hundred years ago; they used
> them for about six months, then dumped them. Klew?
Oh sure.... You don't get yelled at by dorayme when you say the exact
same thing I did.
The only difference is I said it with some flair...
On Apr 16, 5:57 pm, dorayme
> Here is something, Travis, from me to you, for you to misunderstand. I
> like and succeed in being badly misunderstood.
So we agree.
In article
<5ff1fa84-c0dc-4f54-9b77-34b80c7285e9@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Travis Newbury
> On Apr 16, 6:12 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
>
> > Frames were invented by Netscape about a hundred years ago; they used
> > them for about six months, then dumped them. Klew?
>
> Oh sure.... You don't get yelled at by dorayme when you say the exact
> same thing I did.
>
> The only difference is I said it with some flair...
O come on Travis... I didn't do no yelling. I was whispering all hoarse
like, whip held tightly and hidden behind my back...
Plus, B is not saying what you are saying. He was giving a fact, you
were speculating. And when Travis speculates, dorayme whispers things
back.
--
dorayme
On Apr 16, 9:10 pm, dorayme
> > Oh sure.... You don't get yelled at by dorayme when you say the exact
> > same thing I did.
> > The only difference is I said it with some flair...
> O come on Travis... I didn't do no yelling. I was whispering all hoarse
> like, whip held tightly and hidden behind my back...
Hell, I actually think you were agreeing with me, just saying it
nicer.
In article
Travis Newbury
> On Apr 16, 9:10 pm, dorayme
> > > Oh sure.... You don't get yelled at by dorayme when you say the exact
> > > same thing I did.
> > > The only difference is I said it with some flair...
> > O come on Travis... I didn't do no yelling. I was whispering all hoarse
> > like, whip held tightly and hidden behind my back...
>
> Hell, I actually think you were agreeing with me, just saying it
> nicer.
Seriously, yes and no. I think it bad to completely stamp out all uses
of frames, we have a moral duty to preserve the species and have it out
in the world competing and living as best as it can. People here are
hell bent on frameicide.
Even those that would have endangered species in zoos have some
heartfelt hopes of a return to the wild. The heartless regulars here
would not even countenance a zoo for poor frames. That is what concerns
me.
Travis, I don't suppose you would be interested in joining my new
organization, Framepeace? Please send $US10. And anyone else - Boji? -
who wants to Save the Frame from extinction.
--
dorayme
dorayme wrote:
> .. People here are hell bent on frameicide.
I committed frameicide two weeks after I started writing my first web
site back in 1997. Such a mess! (Well, it *was* the very first version
of FrontPlague...)
I switched to a text editor at that time.
--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Vista
On 16 Apr 2008, dorayme
>> Hell, I actually think you were agreeing with me, just saying it
>> nicer.
>
> Seriously, yes and no. I think it bad to completely stamp out all uses
> of frames, we have a moral duty to preserve the species and have it
> out in the world competing and living as best as it can. People here
> are hell bent on frameicide.
>
> Even those that would have endangered species in zoos have some
> heartfelt hopes of a return to the wild. The heartless regulars here
> would not even countenance a zoo for poor frames. That is what
> concerns me.
>
> Travis, I don't suppose you would be interested in joining my new
> organization, Framepeace? Please send $US10. And anyone else - Boji? -
> who wants to Save the Frame from extinction.
Me - send money? Ha ha ha ha!! Yeah, right.
Seriously, though, this is boring. I like it better when you are in
virtual dingbat mode. It may not be logical, but somehow it's just more
human. -Okay: "animal" then.
--
Neredbojias
http://www.neredbojias.com/
Great sights and sounds
In article
Neredbojias
> On 16 Apr 2008, dorayme
>
> >> Hell, I actually think you were agreeing with me, just saying it
> >> nicer.
> >
> > Seriously, yes and no. I think it bad to completely stamp out all uses
> > of frames, we have a moral duty to preserve the species and have it
> > out in the world competing and living as best as it can. People here
> > are hell bent on frameicide.
> >
> > Even those that would have endangered species in zoos have some
> > heartfelt hopes of a return to the wild. The heartless regulars here
> > would not even countenance a zoo for poor frames. That is what
> > concerns me.
> >
> > Travis, I don't suppose you would be interested in joining my new
> > organization, Framepeace? Please send $US10. And anyone else - Boji? -
> > who wants to Save the Frame from extinction.
>
> Me - send money? Ha ha ha ha!! Yeah, right.
>
> Seriously, though, this is boring. I like it better when you are in
> virtual dingbat mode. It may not be logical, but somehow it's just more
> human. -Okay: "animal" then.
Oh you mean when I found an organization called Framepeace to save html
frames, this is not dingbat enough for you?
(Just btw, there is no animal in me, I am thing. "it" is the correct
pronoun to use unless it begins a sentence, in which case it is "It". I
know how puzzled you get over case. And you might insist, wrongly, that
I should have begun the last sentence with "It". Still bored? Still not
dingbatty enough for you? Tell me the level you want. I aim to please.)
--
dorayme
On 16 Apr 2008, dorayme
>> > Travis, I don't suppose you would be interested in joining my new
>> > organization, Framepeace? Please send $US10. And anyone else -
>> > Boji? - who wants to Save the Frame from extinction.
>>
>> Me - send money? Ha ha ha ha!! Yeah, right.
>>
>> Seriously, though, this is boring. I like it better when you are in
>> virtual dingbat mode. It may not be logical, but somehow it's just
>> more human. -Okay: "animal" then.
>
> Oh you mean when I found an organization called Framepeace to save
> html frames, this is not dingbat enough for you?
>
> (Just btw, there is no animal in me, I am thing. "it" is the correct
> pronoun to use unless it begins a sentence, in which case it is "It".
> I know how puzzled you get over case. And you might insist, wrongly,
> that I should have begun the last sentence with "It". Still bored?
> Still not dingbatty enough for you? Tell me the level you want. I aim
> to please.)
You know, you are right! It's me - I'm at fault. It's not that you're
not dingbatty, it's just that I've become so used to your dingbattiness,
it seems (almost) normal and resultantly mundane. I suppose I will have
to purge my mind again, or perhaps you could come up with some new
tricks to give your idiosyncratic pysche some fresh pizzazz? I really
have tried other people who seemed potentially wierd, but Travis is
undependable, Blinky goes into long sulks under the sea, and Jukka
doesn't answer anything he can't answer cleverly enough. What's a po'
country boy to do?
--
Neredbojias
http://www.neredbojias.com/
Great sights and sounds
In article <480679e4$0$3358$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
"Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
> Overnight wrote:
>
> > I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
> > bottom.
>
> The obligatory posting:
> http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
>
> Frames were invented by Netscape about a hundred years ago; they used
> them for about six months, then dumped them. Klew?
>
> I hate scrolling half-a-page. Use server-side includes instead, and
> present one page.
>
> > THanks for help.
>
> You're very welcome.
I would suggest that the OP ignore this "advice".
Tim Streater wrote:
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>> Overnight wrote:
>>> I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
>>> bottom.
>>
>> The obligatory posting:
>> http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
>>
>> Frames were invented by Netscape about a hundred years ago; they
>> used them for about six months, then dumped them. Klew?
>>
>> I hate scrolling half-a-page. Use server-side includes instead, and
>> present one page.
>>
>>> THanks for help.
>>
>> You're very welcome.
>
> I would suggest that the OP ignore this "advice".
Care to go into a detail or three? You think frames are a good idea?
--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Vista
In article <48079beb$0$7696$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
"Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
> Tim Streater wrote:
>
> > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
> >> Overnight wrote:
> >>> I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
> >>> bottom.
> >>
> >> The obligatory posting:
> >> http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
> >>
> >> Frames were invented by Netscape about a hundred years ago; they
> >> used them for about six months, then dumped them. Klew?
> >>
> >> I hate scrolling half-a-page. Use server-side includes instead, and
> >> present one page.
> >>
> >>> THanks for help.
> >>
> >> You're very welcome.
> >
> > I would suggest that the OP ignore this "advice".
>
> Care to go into a detail or three? You think frames are a good idea?
Horses for courses, Beau. If it works, use it. I got two or three apps
that use frames and I ain't about to rewrite them just because you got
ants in your pants.
Several people on this NG need to be a bit (no, a *lot*) less precious
about a number of topics and stop pretending that they are the font of
all wisdom before which we should all bow and then sup the waters.
Give the guy straightforward advice or keep your trap shut.
Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <48079beb$0$7696$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
>
>> Tim Streater wrote:
>>
>>> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>>>> Overnight wrote:
>>>>> THanks for help.
>>>> You're very welcome.
>>> I would suggest that the OP ignore this "advice".
>> Care to go into a detail or three? You think frames are a good idea?
>
> Horses for courses, Beau. If it works, use it. I got two or three apps
> that use frames and I ain't about to rewrite them just because you got
> ants in your pants.
Legacy is one think, but please do not advocate promoting a long
obsolete methodology that was fraught with problems, and not replace
with far better solutions. Lumberjack abandoned the ax when the chainsaw
came around. One only has to do a quick search of this group to see the
the problems frame|iframe cause. Certainly do not perpetuate the pain,
no new frame sites...
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
Tim Streater wrote:
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>> Tim Streater wrote:
>>> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>>>> Overnight wrote:
>>>>> I got an index page built with four frames : top, left, center and
>>>>> bottom.
>>>>
>>>> The obligatory posting:
>>>> http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
>>>
>>> I would suggest that the OP ignore this "advice".
>>
>> Care to go into a detail or three? You think frames are a good idea?
>
> Horses for courses, Beau. If it works, use it. I got two or three apps
> that use frames and I ain't about to rewrite them just because you
> got ants in your pants.
Then it seems that you know how to properly construct a frames site,
unlike Overnight. (who hasn't been back yet)
> Several people on this NG need to be a bit (no, a *lot*) less
> precious about a number of topics and stop pretending that they are
> the font of all wisdom before which we should all bow and then sup
> the waters.
Precious?
things the good way instead of the bad way.
> Give the guy straightforward advice or keep your trap shut.
Everyone else seems to think the advice was straightforward.
I didn't ask you to rewrite your sites.
--
-bts
-trap is shut; keyboard is active; no ants in pants