Should an IFrame be dead by now?

Question

I spoke with a colleague about the problem we were experiencing, and he suggested that using IFrame was one possible solution.

I didn’t need to use IFrame for it for the last 5 years, and I did the full development of web applications, but it made me wonder if the concept of IFrame and Framesets is what browsers support for backward compatibility, but really should not be actively used in developing?

Answer 1

This is one of the main integration methods for facebook and myspace applications. and most wysiwyg html editors rely on iframes. Toolbox uses iframe. drupal uses iframes. and so on ... so I'm not sure it's so easy to just make an iframe obsolete. I assume that it will be actively used for a long time yet ...

Answer 2

This is the fastest and easiest way to get any of several google services on a web page where full control over API integration is not required.

Like everything else, it is situational. This is far from dead, and there is no reason why it should be dead. A network moving towards a weaker connection, and the IFrame matches that.

Answer 3

IFrame , , , - API, -.

Answer 4

, . . , COMET

Answer 5

, . , , , . divs Ajax , iframes. , iframes ( Javascripting CSS), .

, , , , , .

Answer 6

; .

Answer 7

, iFrames , , - ( , ). , iFrames, Framesets NO. , . iframes, , , , . jscript 2 iframe, , , javascript. iFrames - , .

Answer 8

, AJAX.

, , AJAX, , .. , , AJAX. , IFrame, AJAX .

=)

Answer 9

. - MSIE (, div, a <select>), .

Answer 10

, , iframe . , - , , , , . , HTTP- Javascript, iframe.

, , , , . , iframes . URL- .

A simple example is image snapping. Cross reference to the image will be done as follows:

<a href="someImageURL">Link to the image</a>

While image embedding will be achieved as follows:

<iframe src="someImageURL" />

Of course, you can use the "img" element to embed the image instead, but this is typical for images ... I voted to remove the "img" element in favor of using a more general and flexible iframe.