Geek Answers Handbook

Is it wrong to use iframes? Can iframes be translated into images in the same way that canvases can be made?

I saw a lot of complaints around the Internet not to use frames, and I thought that bad practice uses frames, plus they are outdated.

However, iframes are not deprecated, but they are frames. Is it a bad practice to use them?

Also, can an iframe be displayed for data: png / base64 or something else, just like canvases can be?

+8
html iframe
source share
1 answer

However, iframes are not deprecated, but they are frames. Is it a bad practice to use them?

Sometimes you need to embed a separate HTML document in another, and that's all right. For writing, HTML5 has a whole section devoted to embedding external content, one of the corresponding elements of which is iframe ( W3C HTML5 ).

Of course, something good or bad practice also depends heavily on your precedent, but the most practical questions tend to be quite broad in nature.

Also, can iframes be displayed for data: png / base64 or whatever, just like canvases can?

Actually, yes, although IE does not support data:text/html at the moment :

 <iframe src="data:text/html,<!DOCTYPE html><html><body><p>abc"></iframe>

However, this is not the “right” way to do this (even the validators disagree on whether the syntax is correct) the W3C Nu validator does not seem to like data:text/html because of all the HTML characters, while Validator. nu only complains about unwritten spaces in DOCTYPE). To embed raw HTML, you need to use the new srcdoc attribute instead of src (which has even less browser support ):

 <iframe srcdoc="<!DOCTYPE html><html><body><p>abc"></iframe>

So, in general, specifying raw HTML for iframes is a bad idea for today, and even when browsers start supporting the srcdoc attribute, you should use this by the data URI with the src attribute.

+11
source share

More articles:


All Articles