an iframes question (suitability)

[torndownunit]

I have am working on a site for a friend who has very little web design knowledge. His old site is pretty basic and done up in some basic tables. He updated photos every week (with small text descriptions), and he can understand this basic layout.

I have done up a more complicated (nicer looking) design for him. I was considering putting the simple image gallery from his old page in an html file by itself, and having it open on the site in an iFrame. That way he could just edit that one page for his updates, and it would be familiar to him.

It's a small auction site though, and people generally find it when they are searching around for an item in the search engines. Will the search engines still find that text if it's set up the way I describe?

If anyone has any other suggestions, please let me know. Unfortunately a CMS is not an option. Long story as to why, and it it was my choice it's what he would be using. But I can't do much about it.

Thanks

edit: I just noticed one other factor. His gallery is 4 pages linked to each other.

 

[angelwatt]

Search engines generally don't pick up content inside iframes since they often contain data for a different site.

You could keep his stuff in a separate file, then include that file into the main page using either PHP include, or server side includes. This way he'll only see the part he's updating.

 

[torndownunit]

Search engines generally don't pick up content inside iframes since they often contain data for a different site.

You could keep his stuff in a separate file, then include that file into the main page using either PHP include, or server side includes. This way he'll only see the part he's updating.

I just noticed that his gallery pages actually don't include any text descriptions. They are strictly a gallery of images (not even thumbnails linked to enlargements.

So is this a situation where the iframe might actually be a decent option since there isn't really anything for the search engine to search?

If not I will look into the includes. I am just trying to keep things as basic as possible since the site is a favour.

Thanks

 

[angelwatt]

So is this a situation where the iframe might actually be a decent option since there isn't really anything for the search engine to search?

It sounds like a basic personal site so SEO aspects aren't very important no matter the method you end up using. You should still look into the include options though as they really aren't any more difficult to use than an iframe.

 

[torndownunit]

It sounds like a basic personal site so SEO aspects aren't very important no matter the method you end up using. You should still look into the include options though as they really aren't any more difficult to use than an iframe.

I went with your suggestion and used includes in a couple of other sections of the site. Thanks for the tip! Great method and I plan to use it more.

I haven't implemented if for the gallery though. I have a question about the method. It's tough to word.

The neat thing about the iframe method is, being that it's a 4 page gallery you can scroll through all 4 pages. I can set up those 4 gallery pages in really basic html/css and he can edit them.

Using the includes method, I assume I have to make 4 pages that call those 4 bare bones pages of the gallery though? EG the content can't 'replace itself' like it does in an iframe? This is how I have it implemented right now: http://www.kcauctions.ca/test/galleries.html . That effect can't be achieved using a single gallery page like in the link using includes can it?

The iframe seems to totally automate things and allows me to use one main 'gallery' page that he never has to touch. The more pages, the more worried I get about him causing damage lol.

 

[angelwatt]

iframes will probably be the most straight forward manner to do this easily. You could intermingle some AJAX to swap out pages. You could also have made the 4 pages one and use JavaScript to work through them. Just some thoughts, but iframes are fine for this.