Slashdot Mirror


Controversial Web "Framing" Makes a Comeback

theodp writes "The WSJ reports that the controversial practice of framing seems to be making a comeback on the Web. Big sites like Digg, Facebook, Ask.com and StumbleUpon have all begun framing links recently, joining the likes of Google, which employs the technique for Image Search. Long ago, Jakob Nielsen argued that 'frames break the fundamental user model of the web page,' but, today's practitioners contend, 'it's a feature, not a bug,' and say it provides publishers with massive distribution they wouldn't otherwise have."

4 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. Can I close the frame? by reboot246 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the frame has a button or such to close it, I don't have a problem with the frame.

  2. Feature? by WillKemp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a bug not a feature. It's pointless, stupid and annoying.

    Facebook does it (with some links but not others) - and there's just no point to it. The link opens in a new tab and the old tab is still there. It might make sense if you were going to open the link in the same tab, but you're not.

    What possible advantage is there in opening a link in a frame in a new tab - apart from annoying users?

  3. It's good if the frame adds value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It all depends on what the outer frame does. If it adds value to the link - e.g. as Google Image search does, which shows you the picture/allows you to magnify it - then I think that framing is a good idea.

    If, on the other hand, it is just there to try to 'keep the users on your site', then it is plain annoying. If this comes back, so will the frame breakout scripts.

    In any case, a 'close' button should always be provided.

    In my opinion, the way Google Images frames external sites is exemplary, and should be the way others do it too.

  4. Re:Maybe it was bad back in 1996 by RJFerret · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wowzers! I clicked the link and bang, there was the page. It's nice to have a page load in less time on AT&T U-Verse now than back in dialup days. Isn't it weird how we have these amazingly fast connections now but it takes pages longer to load?

    I'm a web user rather than designer, and have never heard of this guy, but I'm glad you define him as a "guru"...I wish more adopted his example.

    I immediate found the search without scrolling (I often just bail on websites without a search).

    There was an obvious separation between categories of info, both by physical and graphic methods.

    There was actual provided content with section titles, so I was able to very quickly find info without trying to discern it through various distractions.

    I bet it would work great on my phone too.

    Speaking of which, sadly it didn't take off, but one trick to a far better web experience was using the mobile version of websites! Much more usable: faster, content without spurious distractions... I wish every website had an m.- alternative to www.-

    Isn't it horrifying that often I will reach for my phone to access the web when I'm sitting in front of my computer with an open web browser?