Do frames an accessible Website make?greenspun.com : LUSENET : MCU - Accessible Web Design : One Thread |
Question: If an important aim of my Website is for it to be accessible, should I use frames on it? The W3c point out that they can be accessibe if I take the appropriate precautions - so what's the problem?
The W3c techniques document also says,
"Frames as implemented today (with the FRAMESET, FRAME, and IFRAME elements) are problematic for several reasons:
- Without scripting, they tend to break the "previous page" functionality offered by browsers.
- It is impossible to refer to the "current state" of a frameset with a URI; once a frameset changes contents, the original URI no longer applies.
- Opening a frame in a new browser window can disorient or simply annoy users.
...We also provide an alternative to frames that uses HTML 4.01 and CSS and addresses many of the limitations of today's frame implementations."
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#alt-frames
I would also add:
As you can guess, I don't regard frames as being a good design choice - even if with a lot of work and testing they could be made accessible.
More on using the use of frames on Websites.
Using frames means you will have problems being listed by search engines.
Users don't like frames, and they are a security risk
"Embedded navigational links are necessary for at least two reasons. The first and most basic reason is that some Web clients simply do not "understand" frames, and likely never will. A second and perhaps more compelling reason is the necessity for Web pages to be self-sufficient and discoverable. Any page devoid of embedded links represents a "dead end" on the WWW. It's difficult to accept the idea that any collection of pages that point nowhere constitutes a 'Web'. " Terry Sullivan: http://www.pantos.org/atw/35617.html
-- Anonymous, April 25, 2002