Frames or no frames?
The use of frames has been a major discussion factor in the past few years. Many people argue that frames boost load time and also make navigation much easier. That is very true. Other people are concerned about people who can not view the page, because their browser doesn't support frames. This may have been true a few years ago, but almost all people have a browser than can view frames, even AOL. There goes one arguement. They are also saying that many people put too many frames, thus increasing load time, because of all the pages needed for the whole thing to work. That is also true. Finally, a big problem with frames is that they do not display preperly on all systems, because webmasters usually put a % value instead of a pixel value, to work on their desktop setting. Other people w/ other settings view the page completely differently, thus creating a problem.
I think the whole arguement on frames is based on your own preference, and the preference of those who are argueing about this whole thing. If you like frames, use them, but keep in mind a few things: 1) Keep the amount of frames under 4. 2) Use pixel values for width and height instead of % values. 3) Test your page with different browsers and with different desktop settings to see if your page views right.
I personally am someone who likes not to use frames. I think frames are a pain in the butt to work with, and like the look of single pages. There is one main downfall of using single pages. If you want to have the same navigation menu in every page, it takes a long time to load. You can see an example of this at PlanetQuake. (Keep in mind this is my opinion) They have a great navigation menu, but it takes a while to load on my machine.
It's your decision to use frames or not, but please keep it reasonable.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
All quake, quake 2, and quake arena content is © id software
All unreal content is © epic megagames, and half-life © valve software
Page designed by mr. baldy ( webmaster )