Last modified: 2007-02-20 01:16:28 UTC
The following lines one can read at the support:
MediaWiki contains protection against abusive use of frame sets. Unfortunately
this will trap your intentional frames as well...
Wikipedia is probably the biggest lift for learning in internethistory. Still I
think there is tremendous much more potential in Wikipedia do be explored. Very
nice possibilities exist to make elearning applications using Wikipedia and
other wikis as part of the whole elearning application. If you want to design
this application as an Rich Internet Application, RIA, it's nice to use
communication between different iframes to be able to present the information in
So how dangerous are iframes? If everything which links from
http://wikipedia.tv/ would be non framebreakers I would be very happy. So please
comment like this:
// Un-trap us from framesets if( window.top != window ) window.top.location =
V peace V
Frames break bookmarks, printing, saving, and other general behavior as well as
being a common tool for bandwidth-thievery (slapping ads onto content served by
someone else's bandwidth bill).
This is really painful to get around.
I'm working on an application that helps in automating image license checking in
HuWiki similarly to Interwiki link checker. It shows the image information page
from Wikipedia with the image and licencing information in one frame and offers
a set of options in another frame.
The Wiki page taking over the top frame makes this a huge pain in the neck.
I couldn't find an easy way to turn this off event though I'm a sysop in HuWiki.
E' veramente interessante constatare che un'iniziativa che
nelle intenzioni dovrebbe essere un atto di liberalità
culturale di fatto risulta asimmetrica: massima liberalità
verso chi contribuisce e liberalità limitata verso chi
La natura umana è proprio piena di sorprendenti riserve !
Viva la Maradona della Napoli!!!!
A men Ferdinad varför är inte du ute och stångas med de andra tjurarna...
Don't understand but it sounds great !
Reopen to mark as duplicate of [].
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 6070 ***