frames in portlets

[PS Ashwin]

May be this is a silly question...
But is it really not possible for a portlet to render jsp files containing frames and framesets.
Is there some specific reason why it is so?
what is the design alternative for this? I mean my work involves showing some data in a organised format in a portlet. I am used to using frames to organize my contents in a web page.
what can i do for a portlet now?

I am using websphere portal 6.0 and JSR168 API

Thanks.

[Pavel Kubal]

Hi, have you considered using framew inside an i-frame?

[Sanjay Kannan]

Avoid using iframes in portlet, cause they have other issues along with them. If you are in the habit of using frames to organize, try thinking to use portlet to portlet communication.
I mean you can split the tasks which you do in a frame to a portlet.
What exactly are you doing with the frames?

[Cameron Wallace McKenzie]

So, how do I say this without sounding preachy?

Frames are a great way for someone learning html to lay out a web page, but any application that can perl or jsps should be using HTML tables for layout and navigation. There are just too many drawbacks to frames.

Where you have one frame, just use a JSP:include or some equivalent, and the need for frames goes away completely.

I like to take my design cues from the big players like IBM, Microsoft and Sun. For design ideas, I always go there to get ideas about what's good, usable, but not overly flashy. You won't see them using frames on their customer facing sites - it's just not a good approach.

Redesign, and factor out the frames.

-Cameron McKenzie

[Bear Bibeault]

Originally posted by Cameron McKenzie:
but any application that can perl or jsps should be using HTML tables for layout and navigation.

How can I say this without sounding preachy? Tables for layout are a throwback to the 1990's. CSS should be used for layout.

There are just too many drawbacks to frames.

That we can agree upon.
[ November 26, 2007: Message edited by: Bear Bibeault ]

[Pavel Kubal]

Originally posted by Cameron McKenzie:
So, how do I say this without sounding preachy?

Frames are a great way for someone learning html to lay out a web page, but any application that can perl or jsps should be using HTML tables for layout and navigation. There are just too many drawbacks to frames.

Where you have one frame, just use a JSP:include or some equivalent, and the need for frames goes away completely.

I like to take my design cues from the big players like IBM, Microsoft and Sun. For design ideas, I always go there to get ideas about what's good, usable, but not overly flashy. You won't see them using frames on their customer facing sites - it's just not a good approach.

Redesign, and factor out the frames.

-Cameron McKenzie

Really? How about infocenter? I wouln't learn from IBM. I don't take them as good web designers.

[Cameron Wallace McKenzie]

But that's the point, right? Copy what they're doing well.

I knew as soon as I mentioned the big 3, someone would point to a site with frames.

On the point of laying out pages using CSS, that's well taken. But within the portal, at least WebSphere, components are still laid out as table elements. The frame is just a dived out table. A skin is just a single table with three rows. I've never actually seen a WebSphere skins implemented with CSS layouts. I wonder what the implication would be fore page aggregation of the portal.

I'll have to try it in a skin.

-Cameron
[ November 26, 2007: Message edited by: Cameron McKenzie ]

[Bear Bibeault]

"But all my friends are jumping off bridges!"

Doesn't matter who it is; following the precedent of using non-best practices is just a bad idea.

[PS Ashwin]

Thanks for the cool comments.
I made it look good with html tables and css files-No FRAMES

[Cameron Wallace McKenzie]

I'm proud of you.

-Cameron