"Will Pearson" wrote:
"I agree. An alternative would be frames, as a screen reader will read one
frame before moving onto the next. So, the content of a frame won't be
merged with that of another. As an aside, most screen readers also include
the ability to jump from one frame to the next, which can facilitate quicker
From breadcrumbs to frames....
I would recommend against the use of frames for several reasons:
Although the W3C does not say explicitly that frames are deprecated it
clearly recommends HTML 4 and CSS styling instead. Moreover HTML strict does
not allow the use of frames.
Frames are unreliable and do not always work well on different browsers.
Using frames means the pages will not conform with the way the rest of the
Web works - i.e. on the majority of pages, each page is a single unit, with
a single address, and the back button takes the user back to the page
previously visited. Straying from this model means that skills learned on a
frames based site can't be generalised to the rest of the Web.
Scripting is often used in order to overcome all of the problems of using
frames with browsers that do not understand frames, i.e. can't bookmark the
current page, the back button doesn't work, frequent printing problems and
'focus' problems. Several text only browser do not understand scripts - and
the site can become unusable as a result.
Frames will make the site look old and not very stylish compared to using
CSS+ you will have to make an effort to make them accessible.
User Experience specialist
Cimex media Ltd
64 Essex Road, London, N1 8LR
Tel +44 (0)7841597039
[log in to unmask]
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
personal views which are not the views of Cimex Media Ltd and
any affiliated companies, unless specifically stated. It is intended
for the use of the individual or group to whom it is addressed. If
you have received it in error, please delete it from your system,
do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
reliance on it and please notify [log in to unmask]
Checked using avast! anti-virus technology