|
Posted by RichardOnRails on August 23, 2007, 10:00 am
Please log in for more thread options
> On 22 Aug, 14:12, RichardOnRails
>
> > I agree that Frames would work. I've used Frames successfully in the
> > (distant) past for this purpose.
>
> <iframe> isn't the same as a frame. For one thing, you're using a
> different doctype.
>
> > Deprecated elements are only
> > valid in the Transitional and Frameset variants of HTML 4.01 and
> > XHTML1.0.
>
> This is misleading, and I think it's strictly wrong (I haven't checked
> this in detail, as Jukka will do that anyway). "Deprecated" has a
> formal meaning, and it's not the same as "unloved and unlovely".
>
> <font> is deprecated. It's still valid in Transitional, but not
> Strict. It's irrelevant to Frameset.
>
> Frameset doesn't contain (AFAIK) any of the deprecated elements. Only
> Transitional does.
>
> In particular, frames are not deprecated. They're not in Strict, they
> have usability issues (especially the non-inline frames) but they're
> _not_ deprecated.
>
> > But I'm trying to adhere to the concept that HTML is for content, CSS
> > is for presentation, and JavaScript is for dynamic presentation.
>
> So if you ever work out exactly where frames fit into that neat
> categorization, please let us know!
>
> > My long-range goal is to use Ruby on Rails for website development,
> > and RoR uses AJAX for this kind of stuff.
>
> The fact that it does doesn't mean that it's the only way. This is
> onee of Rails' biggest failings, the attitude that all problems can
> only have the one same simplistic Rails solution.
>
> > I feel I have to get a
> > handle on the underlying the underlying technology I just mentioned.
> > I think AJAH suits my purpose.
>
> AJAH is great, except that it's horribly complicated. It's _not_ the
> same thing as AJAX.
>
> As an example, what's wrong with this example code?
> divElement.innerHTML = ajaxUpdateContentRequest.responseText;
> I can count at least 3 things that are in principle wrong with it.
> It's from live code - one of these problems was a live on-site
> customer bug.
>
> As a pragmatic alternative, I use <iframe>. Bit of JS to flip the src
> attribute.
Hi Andy,
> > I agree that Frames would work. I've used Frames successfully in the
> > (distant) past for this purpose.
>
> <iframe> isn't the same as a frame. For one thing, you're using a
> different doctype.
I agree. I didn't notice the "i". Sorry.
> > My long-range goal is to use Ruby on Rails for website development,
> > and RoR uses AJAX for this kind of stuff.
>
> The fact that it does doesn't mean that it's the only way. This is
> onee of Rails' biggest failings, the attitude that all problems can
> only have the one same simplistic Rails solution.
I'll assess that in due time. Right now, I'm focused on HTML, CSS &
JavaScript just because I want to know them much, much better than I
did a month or two ago.
> AJAH is great ...
Excellent.
> ... except that it's horribly complicated.
I'm a retired computer consultant, so I may be equal to the task.
> It's _not_ the same thing as AJAX.
I know. AJAX, at least in the Rails world, seems to be implemented in
two frameworks: Prototype and Script.Aculo.us, which I haven't looked
into. I'm hoping that AJAH is less complicated and will prepare me in
some sense to dig into those frameworks. I'll find out today, or over
the next couple of days.
> As an example, what's wrong with this example code?
> divElement.innerHTML = ajaxUpdateContentRequest.responseText;
> I can count at least 3 things that are in principle wrong with it.
> It's from live code - one of these problems was a live on-site
> customer bug.
>
> As a pragmatic alternative, I use <iframe>. Bit of JS to flip the src
> attribute.
Looking for iFrame info on the Web today, I found two issues that
give me pause:
1. Apparently the Back button applies to the iFrame, rather than the
containing page.
2. The iFrame doesn't resize automatically
So I'm chasing AJAH today, and I'll post back in a few days or so if
I found anything worth reporting or I have more questions/ideas on
this topic.
Again, thanks for for your insights.
Best wishes,
Richard
| 
XML Sitemap