Member Avatar for DanMcLinden

Hi,

Based on review of our home-based photo business site and other reading on this and other forums the opinion seems fairly universal that use of frames is a bad idea, BUT ...

Seems to work...
- with 1024x768 or larger resolution there's no scrollbar on the sample galleries
- buttons, logo and menus stay where I want them (at the top on all pages)
- everything works in IE6/IE7/Mozilla/Safari
- general search-engine results are not very important to me at this stage

Cheap to assemble...
- integrates reasonably w/commission-based (free hosting) sales channel
- tools (Expression-web and JavaScript) are cheap and/or free

Seems to me that the local and casual customer who is hunting for services like ours isn't that likely to say "eww, frames!!" and click away, so I still don't really get why frames are so bad.

I found in the design forums showed drop-down menus that stayed in place... does something like this make better sense? or if not what alternatives would take the smallest least $$ / time / learning-curve?

At some stage we'll probably spend the $$ and up-scale to a Flash-site but not just yet... and if we can't afford $$ for Flash we can't afford a site designer either...

Thanks in advance for any advice or constructive opinions.

  • 4 Contributors
  • 3 Replies
  • 128 Views
  • 1 Week Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by Fungus1487

Dani AI

Generated

Short, practical guidance for that builds on points from , and while keeping cost and simplicity in focus.

Frames do give a fixed header/navigation feel, but they also make bookmarking, analytics, external-shop integration, printing and mobile behaviour awkward. The framing approach complicates deep links and can break third‑party pages that disallow embedding. For a modern, low-cost replacement that keeps a persistent top bar, consider two cheap-to-implement patterns.

CSS fixed header (client-side only). Keeps the nav visible without frames; requires only a small change to each page (or a shared include, see below). Remember to add equal top padding to the page so content is not hidden behind the header.

header {
  position: fixed;
  top: 0;
  left: 0;
  right: 0;
  height: 60px;
  z-index: 999;
  background: #fff;
}
main { padding-top: 60px; }

Shared header without frames. If hosting supports server-side includes or PHP, use a single header file and include it across pages. That keeps maintenance cheap and avoids manual edits to every page.

<!-- header.html -->
<nav>...</nav>

<!-- page.php -->
<?php include 'header.html'; ?>

If the host is static-only, use a tiny client-side include to inject a shared header (works on all modern browsers; test for SEO if search indexing matters):

<div id="site-header"></div>
<script>
fetch('/includes/header.html').then(r=>r.text()).then(t=>document.getElementById('site-header').innerHTML=t);
</script>

Gallery notes: use thumbnails + a lightbox script rather than full-size images in a fixed viewport. Resize images for the web to avoid scrollbars and use CSS max-width/max-height so galleries adapt to 1024x768 and smaller screens. If the sales channel is a third-party page, prefer linking out or using provider APIs; many payment pages block framing (see X-Frame-Options).

For a low-effort migration: convert one gallery page first, switch the header to an include, test navigation/bookmarking, then replace remaining framed pages. This keeps downtime and cost minimal while solving the core usability and maintenance issues.

Recommended Answers

All 3 Replies

Member Avatar for MidiMagic

Frames are deprecated.

XHTML does not support them.

Future browsers will not support them.

Member Avatar for joshua.tilson

Right, frames are so 1990!

But seriously, try using tables, or a pure CSS layout.
Both Are viable options.

Also an all flash site is not recommended, hard for people on older systems to browse, as well as making SEO on your site much more difficult!

Good luck!

Member Avatar for Fungus1487

sorry to plug myself here but i am a web designer and i charge quite inexpesively. that said web design does not have to be an expensive outing. i understand alot of companies will rip you off. go freelance and you can find yourself paying a small % of what you would regularly find. and an entirely flash based website is something to be considered greatly before delving into it.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.