[OreoCookie]

Ok, I am in the process of building my website and so far I have coded everything by hand.

Now, because it is easier to maintain, I want to switch from using a table for the whole thing to frames.

So you know what I'm talking about.

I've run into the following problem:

1. A two-frame layout makes the title scroll (I got that design ready to be uploaded), but that destroys the black-and-white pattern.

2. Using 3 frames: Then, upon clicking in a link, two frames have to be loaded. My problem with that solution is not the possibility, but the maintainability. I would have to maintain two .html files for one page.

While it wouldn't be too bad, I would rather have one page where I define the ‘content,' e. g. the bio of a person instead of two.

[larkost]

I would suggest looking into some sort of server side includes: SSI, PHP, Perl, etc... That way you can have all of the site maintenance benefit of frames, without subjecting your viewers to the problems with frames.

I am sure you can google well enough to find out what you need to know... *hint* *hint*

[Millennium]

I'm going to agree with larkost; if you can use some form of server-side includes, do it. That'll give you the maintainability of frames without the client-side problems inherent in frame-based design.

[cowerd]

Its also a simple css layout.

<div id="header">
<div id="links">
<div id="content">

easy to maintain without server-side stuff. dead simple to maintain with server-side stuff.

[OreoCookie]

So what specific combo do you suggest to me?
I just need a kind of starting point, preferably some example scripts (I can learn quickest if I have some reference examples that I can try to imitate, then manipulate and then I usually try to build from scratch). I also have to check my provider for its abilities AFA PHP and perl is concerned.

I've never done anything in PHP or so, but it took me just a bit more than a day to learn html and css. And I know a bit of shell programming, too, so I guess I can learn that.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by cowerd:
Its also a simple css layout.

<div id="header">
<div id="links">
<div id="content">

easy to maintain without server-side stuff. dead simple to maintain with server-side stuff.

Could you elaborate on that one, please?

What would code look like? Would I have one file with the "content" and another one with links and other stuff?

Right now (the version you see) uses tables (with lots of css, usually <div class="headline">, etc.).

[Millennium]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
So what specific combo do you suggest to me?

If all you plan to do is simple inclusions, then you can't beat Server-Side Includes (which almost everyone supports, at least as far as the include part goes.

For tutorials, check out http://bignosebird.com/ssi.shtml; you want the section on the INCLUDE directive.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by Millennium:
If all you plan to do is simple inclusions, then you can't beat Server-Side Includes (which almost everyone supports, at least as far as the include part goes.

For tutorials, check out http://bignosebird.com/ssi.shtml; you want the section on the INCLUDE directive.

I get a 404, but I'll look for the script mentioned a bit later. Thanx a lot.

[- - e r i k - -]

Frames equals PAIN. Use PHP, it's simple to do includes without knowing more code than adding a php-extension instead of html and putting this in your file

Code:
<? include="file.php" ?>

The extension for the file you include can be anything. Some people prefer .txt, some prefer .html, some prefer .inc. I just have all the files have the same extension and be over with it

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by - - e r i k - -:
Frames equals PAIN. Use PHP, it's simple to do includes without knowing more code than adding a php-extension instead of html and putting this in your file

Code:
<? include="file.php" ?>

The extension for the file you include can be anything. Some people prefer .txt, some prefer .html, some prefer .inc. I just have all the files have the same extension and be over with it

I tried to use <object src="links.html"></object>, but when I clicked in a link, it opened within the small box of the links. I'll try this way though tomorrow. Thanx a lot.

[cowerd]

Could you elaborate on that one, please?

What would code look like? Would I have one file with the "content" and another one with links and other stuff?

Right now (the version you see) uses tables (with lots of css, usually <div class="headline">, etc.).

Look you're getting dumped on with info, but I suggest looking at some CSS tutorials to help with the layout.

Basically CSS will allow you to divide the layout into 3 divs, each with a unique ID. Because of the layout structure, your content DIV is always last, hence easier to hand-roll new content, whether it is server-side generated or inline.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by cowerd:
Look you're getting dumped on with info, but I suggest looking at some CSS tutorials to help with the layout.

Basically CSS will allow you to divide the layout into 3 divs, each with a unique ID. Because of the layout structure, your content DIV is always last, hence easier to hand-roll new content, whether it is server-side generated or inline.

Yes, I understand that. If you take a look at my layout, this is basically what I've done already. But in my case, I would have two and not one content dependent part, namely headline and body. (Just take a look at my source code and my css file.)

So my "content div" wouldn't be last only, but include the header (in this case, a 3 frame design would be easy to implement and sufficient). And also, css (at least in my current form as static htmls) don't solve the problem of separating parts that are to be repeated/centrally updated (link section) and the parts that are updated according to the content.

Unlike from what it seems, I have tried to solve this problem in several ways, each one was unsuccessful because of one thing or another. Frames, update several frames at once using JavaScript, tables, ...

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by Millennium:
If all you plan to do is simple inclusions, then you can't beat Server-Side Includes (which almost everyone supports, at least as far as the include part goes.

For tutorials, check out http://bignosebird.com/ssi.shtml; you want the section on the INCLUDE directive.

The correct link. This looks exactly like what I was looking for. I now have to find out, if my provider has enabled it or not.

I have some problems activating it, but I'll try tomorrow after some sleep (it's almost 3 in the morning here … ).

[ghotirking]

Originally posted by cowerd:
Look you're getting dumped on with info, but I suggest looking at some CSS tutorials to help with the layout.

Basically CSS will allow you to divide the layout into 3 divs, each with a unique ID. Because of the layout structure, your content DIV is always last, hence easier to hand-roll new content, whether it is server-side generated or inline.

Check this out for a start and great examples. You should be able to look at the CSS and come up with your own for the layout you want:
http://www.bluerobot.com/web/layouts/
My site (check my forum profile, it's listed there) has a 3 column layout and has zero tables and zero frames.
I had used the two column layout but I just like the 3 better.
PHP, Perl and CSS.

[OreoCookie]

Thanx Millenium, that has done the trick and is exactly what I need! Plus, I have tested it with my provider already, and it works!

Perfect, really. I couldn't be happier

I just need to enable it on my Mac for testing purposes, but I'll figure that out.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by ghotirking:
Check this out for a start and great examples. You should be able to look at the CSS and come up with your own for the layout you want:
http://www.bluerobot.com/web/layouts/
My site (check my forum profile, it's listed there) has a 3 column layout and has zero tables and zero frames.
I had used the two column layout but I just like the 3 better.
PHP, Perl and CSS.

Thanx, I've seen that link already on my quest.

I didn't have time to switch my layout to a ‘no tables' layout yet. That'll be the next revision. For now, I'll source the links and the flag. But it'll be quite intriguing to have a css only layout (except for the images and stuff maybe).

[cowerd]

its quick and very dirty, and my css-fu sucks (IOW it will look like **** in IE)--i'm just learning, but check this vs. your markup:

http://homepage.mac.com/vpd22/oreo/

BTW everything in my css markup should be very semantic, well behaved and lightweight.

[thePurpleGiant]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
I just need to enable it on my Mac for testing purposes, but I'll figure that out.

When you do, come back and tell me!

Anyone else know how to enable this on my own computer?

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by cowerd:
its quick and very dirty, and my css-fu sucks (IOW it will look like **** in IE)--i'm just learning, but check this vs. your markup:

http://homepage.mac.com/vpd22/oreo/

BTW everything in my css markup should be very semantic, well behaved and lightweight.

Well thanks, I'll integrate that into my next update. It doesn't do what I asked for (namely, in TeX-words sourcing, certain files, thus separating things that are repeated in the design. But it does look a lot easier in terms of HTML source (XHTML to be precise).

Thanks.