Please Help, making site with frames in DW CS3

[mashinhead]

So i'm making a portfolio site with frames in CS3 and it's racking my brain

i'm having two major issues

the first is saving. I've made all my pages and linked them. I'm just putting them in the frames. The problem is i make a frameset, it has two windows one on the left for navigation and one on the right, the main one. but when i try to preview it in the browser it prompts me to save, naturally. the problem is it wants me to save everything with new names. including the html documents i've told it to load in the frames. I'm under the impression those are already saved. Why do i have to save and rename them again??

Second, when it prompts me it doesn't define what its asking me to save, the left frame, right frame or the frameset. so that is messing me up too


the second problem i'm having is with the left frame, which is the nav.

Tha frame has the main menu and one sub menu, so i created two html docs for the left window. one being nav.html, and one subnav.html. the first is 307 pixels wide and the secon 420, because the sub nav is the same as the nav page but has the sub nav in html attached to it, because i didn't want to nest frames.

so i'm having two issues with that. I want the left frame to automatically fit to the nav.html and the subnav.html pages since they are different widths. Percent and fixed do not do that, so how would i do that.

Second when i click on the main nav links in the sub nav, the sub nav links do not go away. this means i have to tell it to load the main nav in the left frame, AND tell it to load the appropriate link in the mainframe at the same time.

this i don't know how to do.

i'm trying to do this asap. please help. i can aim.

 

[SrWebDeveloper]

Help, courtesy of an excellent DW frames tutorial found here:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Saving can be a bit complicated with frames. Keep in mind that the frameset page is the outside page that tells the browser what goes where, and the inside pages are all normal HTML pages.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]• If you go to File > Save All Frames, it will prompt you to save everything: both the frameset and the pages it contains. Pay attention to what it prompts you to save. It will prompt you to save the frameset with a default name similar to "UntitledFrameset.htm." Normal pages will have a default name similar to just "Untitled.htm." If the frameset is your main page, you should name it index.html so that the browser will open that first when going to your URL.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]• To save individual pages, click on the page you want to save and go to File > Save Frame As (or File > Save Frame if you've already saved it before.) If you're given the option to Save Frameset instead of Save Frame, make sure you've clicked in the frame of the page you want to save.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]• To save the frameset itself, click on the frameset border or any of the frame dividing lines so that a dotted line appears around the page. Then go to File > Save Frameset As.[/FONT]

That should remedy your current situation.

Have you considered an alternative layout using CSS with div's that can be positioned absolutely, set as viewports with scrollbars enabled or not via the overflow property? This allows for complete control of layout via a single stylesheet and combined with a simple template setup (i.e. a PHP file included within each div) one can create a frames-like page. Remember, not all legacy browsers support frames hence the W3C spec for a noframes tag, and iframes are even less widely supported. If you want dynamic changing of specific DIV's via form actions or links in any DIV just introduce Ajax and you now have the best of all worlds.

-jim

Thought I'd add an example of what I mean:

http://www.mark-allen.net/notes/layout/frames/

Just an FYI for those interested in a frames substitute solution. I am not one of those "I hate frames" guys, but I will say the CSS solution certainly addresses alot of headaches with frames (some hinted at in the link above, i.e. bookmarking and view issues via single URL).

-jim

 

[mashinhead]

i'm not well versed in code. to me css was always a way to format text. is there a thorough and easy to follow tutorial to help me make the css.... thats all i need really.

i also wanted to use lightbox 2, but i'm having aproblem getting that up

either way i do need some kind of fuctioning site today

 

[SrWebDeveloper]

is there a thorough and easy to follow tutorial to help me make the css.... thats all i need really.

i also wanted to use lightbox 2, but i'm having aproblem getting that up

either way i do need some kind of fuctioning site today

maybe you can check it out and give me some suggestions.

If you wish to pursue the CSS method, I already included a link in my second reply - it's easy to read and shows the HTML and the stylesheet with the CSS already setup and start changing height, width, top and left values to see change size and positioning. Pretty easy editing one file, eh?

I suggest you read the W3C CSS Tutorial which also serves as a great reference.

I checked out your site and really enjoyed it - I like the 3 column layout and how the content changes horizontally when links are clicked. The site is elegant in design (I hate to use the word "simple") and gets the job done with the content being the focus. Bravo!

-jim

 

[antoneoh]

I used this website to help me understand tablesless CSS in DW.

http://www.ndesign-studio.com/resources/dreamweaver/basic-css-tableless/

 

[decksnap]

I think the design is way too wide. I didn't even see the L2 menus. I had to widen my window to 1200! px to get the L2 nav to fit.

 

[SrWebDeveloper]

Excellent point, I forgot this computer at work is set to 1152x864 which is larger than 800x600 "standard" setup (looks fine on my iMac at 1600x1280 at home, heh). Maybe they could eliminate some white space in the first two panels. Scrollbars do show when needed (auto) but sure is ugly (my .02).

BTW, the main frames page has 5 major errors and doesn't even come close to W3C validation, so some bad code might be affecting certain browsers as well. Bottom line is validate, fix errors, remove whitespace, adjust the cols attribute as necessary.

-jim

 

[decksnap]

Excellent point, I forgot this computer at work is set to 1152x864 which is larger than 800x600 "standard" setup (looks fine on my iMac at 1600x1280 at home, heh). Maybe they could eliminate some white space in the first two panels. Scrollbars do show when needed (auto) but sure is ugly (my .02).

BTW, the main frames page has 5 major errors and doesn't even come close to W3C validation, so some bad code might be affecting certain browsers as well. Bottom line is validate, fix errors, remove whitespace, adjust the cols attribute as necessary.

-jim

I haven't used 800x600 as the standard for over a year at least. 1024x768 is the new minimum afaiac. Either way, this one's wayyyy too wide.

 

[SrWebDeveloper]

You're absolutely right, I stand corrected!

It's clearly a majority 1024x768 world as per the W3C:

Date Higher 1024x768 800x600 640x480 Unknown
January 2008 38% 48% 8% 0% 6%
January 2007 26% 54% 14% 0% 6%
January 2006 17% 57% 20% 0% 6%
January 2005 12% 53% 30% 0% 5%
January 2004 10% 47% 37% 1% 5%
January 2003 6% 40% 47% 2% 5%
January 2002 6% 34% 52% 3% 5%
January 2001 5% 29% 55% 6% 5%
January 2000 4% 25% 56% 11% 4%

Source

So the OP should work on the width aspects, fix the numerous errors that cause validation issues and all will be well.

-jim

 

[decksnap]

and for that minimum size, the actual usable pixels is somewhere around 960 wide, give or take.