Re: LYNX-DEV Re: Lynx question: frames and <object>

[Jan Hlavacek]

On Mon, Mar 23, 1998 at 01:58:19PM -0800, Matt Ackeret wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Mar 1998, Al Gilman wrote:
> >Lynx displays both the frames as links and the contents of the
> ><NOFRAMES> section.  Given that competently done <NOFRAMES> 
> >sections are in the minority, and not syntactically verifiable
> >to be such, it is probably best that Lynx continue to do this.
> 
> So this is why we get _usable_ frames sites(*) and "you need a frames capable
> browser to use this site" messages all of the time?
> 
> I think the <NOFRAMES> stuff should not be shown, since Lynx does support
> frames, sort of.

Sometimes,  the NOFRAMES section contains a link to a "lynx friendly"
version of the document,  which is easier to navigate with lynx.

Not speaking about the fact that someone can completely hide a page from
netscape/msie crowd by puting it in the noframe section,  and creating
some bogus frameset.  

The nice thing about lynx is that it can go both ways.

-- 
Jan Hlav\'{a}\v{c}ek
address@hidden  (Blind Carbon Copies will bounce)
www: http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~lahvak/