![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
Some history and more dates would have been apprec. 207.112.68.225 ( talk) 17:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
So, how do I embed an Iframe in a mediawiki page? Minitrue
There should be some discussion in this article about the use of contenteditable and designmode with iframes, as it is currently quita a popular use.
Should there be a discussion about how iframes are being used (abused) by phishing and malware authors?
Isn't there alot of criticism of iframes? And I don't think they comply with W3C so is it good or bad? -- 60.234.50.13 20:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC) ( User:Nzhamstar)
IFrames are NOT included in the specification for XHTML 1.0 Strict. See http://www.w3.org/ They suggest using the <object> tag instead, but that method isn't supported in all modern browsers. I'll try to find some references and examples for this later on. Peaceoutside 00:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
There may be some argument for including some discussion of accessibility issues that can arise with iframes - http://www.webaim.org/techniques/frames/#iframe There aren't insurmountable problems, but there are consideration generally not included in iframe implementations. Samatva ( talk) 19:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I received a message today that is going out to Yahoo Groups users telling them that as of March 26, 2007, "In order to better protect our users against online threats..., we can no longer support IFrames." Users were provided a link to this article to explain what IFrames are.-- Hjal 23:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Dear Yahoo! Groups User:
Starting March 26, 2007, you'll notice a few changes when you log into your Group.
- In the past we have allowed group owners to customize their home pages using IFrames ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IFRAME). In order to better protect our users against online threats (learn more about online threats here: http://security.yahoo.com/), we can no longer support IFrames. If you currently use IFrames to display another web page on your group's home page, it will no longer appear. See the Yahoo! Groups Team blog ( http://blog.360.yahoo.com/y_groups_team) to learn what HTML tags are allowed to help personalize your group description.
-- 68.239.240.144 12:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
It's been three months. Presumably Yahoo! Groups no longer has this message, so can't we unprotect now? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I am a bit confused by the following content:
An IFrame can be planted on an unsuspecting legitimate website, leading the casual viewer into an infection threat.
This suggests, to me at least, that an iframe can be used as a sort of virus. More specifically, it sounds as if a black-hat hacker could go to my non- SNS page and simply put a malicious iframe on to my otherwise unsuspecting home page. My basic understanding of html and web publishing makes me think this is not really what the sentence is supposed to mean. However, I could be wrong, and if so, I think the sentence should be more explicit. What I think the sentence is intended to convey is one of two ideas, or both:
In any or all of these cases, I think the statement aforementioned needs to be edited for clarity and accuracy. Otherwise, it is not only vague but irresponsible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.216.139 ( talk) 04:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
Some history and more dates would have been apprec. 207.112.68.225 ( talk) 17:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
So, how do I embed an Iframe in a mediawiki page? Minitrue
There should be some discussion in this article about the use of contenteditable and designmode with iframes, as it is currently quita a popular use.
Should there be a discussion about how iframes are being used (abused) by phishing and malware authors?
Isn't there alot of criticism of iframes? And I don't think they comply with W3C so is it good or bad? -- 60.234.50.13 20:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC) ( User:Nzhamstar)
IFrames are NOT included in the specification for XHTML 1.0 Strict. See http://www.w3.org/ They suggest using the <object> tag instead, but that method isn't supported in all modern browsers. I'll try to find some references and examples for this later on. Peaceoutside 00:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
There may be some argument for including some discussion of accessibility issues that can arise with iframes - http://www.webaim.org/techniques/frames/#iframe There aren't insurmountable problems, but there are consideration generally not included in iframe implementations. Samatva ( talk) 19:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I received a message today that is going out to Yahoo Groups users telling them that as of March 26, 2007, "In order to better protect our users against online threats..., we can no longer support IFrames." Users were provided a link to this article to explain what IFrames are.-- Hjal 23:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Dear Yahoo! Groups User:
Starting March 26, 2007, you'll notice a few changes when you log into your Group.
- In the past we have allowed group owners to customize their home pages using IFrames ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IFRAME). In order to better protect our users against online threats (learn more about online threats here: http://security.yahoo.com/), we can no longer support IFrames. If you currently use IFrames to display another web page on your group's home page, it will no longer appear. See the Yahoo! Groups Team blog ( http://blog.360.yahoo.com/y_groups_team) to learn what HTML tags are allowed to help personalize your group description.
-- 68.239.240.144 12:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
It's been three months. Presumably Yahoo! Groups no longer has this message, so can't we unprotect now? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I am a bit confused by the following content:
An IFrame can be planted on an unsuspecting legitimate website, leading the casual viewer into an infection threat.
This suggests, to me at least, that an iframe can be used as a sort of virus. More specifically, it sounds as if a black-hat hacker could go to my non- SNS page and simply put a malicious iframe on to my otherwise unsuspecting home page. My basic understanding of html and web publishing makes me think this is not really what the sentence is supposed to mean. However, I could be wrong, and if so, I think the sentence should be more explicit. What I think the sentence is intended to convey is one of two ideas, or both:
In any or all of these cases, I think the statement aforementioned needs to be edited for clarity and accuracy. Otherwise, it is not only vague but irresponsible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.216.139 ( talk) 04:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)