Using ASP.NET, when running, my site address line displays only the URL (http://www.xxxx.com). This doesn't change when pages change except after returning from a page which is done using a QueryString. Then the address line contains the compete URL with the QueryString - and no matter what pages you display and return from afterwards, the address line still contains the same QueryString.

How can you alther the address line in IE?


Sandra MacGregor

__________________
Sandy

Sandra,

Is this the same site that's using frames in our other thread?

If so, I'm afraid you are going to run into the same problem. The frameset is one URL. It never changes. As you navigate around your framed pages, the IE url will never change. That's because the main window of IE is still on the frameset URL, while the frames ("sub-windows" if you will) are going to the other locations. About the only thing you could do is not use frames, or use a complex method of having every page consist of a frameset and a content page such that all links reference the top window and load a frameset that specifies which content page to use. But that kind of defeats the purpose of using a frameset.

Peter
------------------------------------------------------
Work smarter, not harder.

Peter,

Yes, it's the same site. And yes, it happens returning to the frameset from pages which are '_top'. I hoped the address line would return to the site only or to the frameset when that is what's showing.
It's OK. Thank you for the explanation of why the address line does not return to the frameset when the pages do.

Thanks again and always.



Sandra MacGregor

Sorry, I had to let this one out, though it is a bit old! You might already have seen it.

;););)

(I have followed your other thread).

Jacob,

Very interesting article. I wanted to play devils advocate (I seem rather good at that.):

The article says that the use of frames is bad partly because of the URL issue. A given URL does not correctly represent the existing state of the pages in a frameset. Couldn't one then argue now that in a non-framed dynamic site the URL still has the potential to not represent the state of a page. Take the p2p "Members" page for example. Unless you are logged in, you cannot view that page and you get an error message. Doesn't this break the theory? ;)

This point aside, I'm not a fan of frames particularly when you have dynamic sites and have to deal with all the frame to frame script. They certainly can be used well in the right application.

Peter
------------------------------------------------------
Work smarter, not harder.

Jacob,

Thanks for your link and site. I agree with your 10 top mistakes of design. Strongly! I always try to obscure constant animation, blinking, popups, etc. as very distracting to the design.

Also I've bookmarked your site for learning.

But for my site in question, the left frame is only to maintain the navigation constantly available. (When I learn how to do menus this may change.) Then I realized the product pages shouldn't have that navigation to contain the user's interest to the products. Also the product pages will be changed to all DB-filled templates.

I hadn't understood before about the effect of frames on bookmarking and search engines. A really good point! On this site, though, if you can only bookmark the first of the framed pages that's OK because the product pages can be bookmarked and found by search engines. Yes? or maybe No. Does this mean that the contents of the frames of the initial page canNOT be seen by search engines? If so, I'll change it.

Another good point is the browser types. I understood that .NET handled all of them. In any case I'm told the users of this site are all computer illiterate and only use up to date MS IE. Nevertheless, a non-framed version is available. How can I use <noframes> to access it?


Sandra MacGregor

I only posted the article because I think it is interesting, and not to state an opinion... I somewhat agree with you Peter.

For the example of the Members page; if you are not logged in at Wrox, an error message will be shown, but you are still at that page! The point being that you can still give the URL to someone you would like to show exactly that page, and it is up to the developer to present enough information to let the user know that you have to be logged in. Using frames you will not be able to do this unless you are a bit innovative, and getting the correct URL for the frame which is interesting!

By the way, if you have got no history when visiting the members page without being logged on, the Back to Forum link doesn't work, due to the fact that javascript history.go(-1) is used!

I have seen some sites scripting there way out of the frame problems; that is, supplying users with an URL of each page (not in address field), and redirecting if the e.g. the menu page is shown by itself, however this is more like a hack in by eyes, but that is surely just an opinion. And furthermore as Peter says, one has to deal with the frame-to-frame scripts.

One day I was looking for some shelfs (in danish 'reoler') which I knew the name of (at-bo), so I searched for these using google, which brought me to this page. The uppermost hit, gives me the main page, however this is what it should look like. They didn't include script to redirect for the frameset.

And Sandra... Yes! :)

Hope you weren't offended by the post; just wanted to share an interesting article ! Sorry!

Jacob.

Jacob,

Very good point. In this era of dynamic sites, expecting the content of the page to correct is pretty rediculous. But as you said, the URL is still a legitimate representation of the "current view" where the frameset URL is not.

-p

Jacob,

No apology needed at all! I wasn't offened, and I've enjoyed the discussion and the link information.


Sandra MacGregor