I too prefer working with Pub 2000, for a lot of reasons. However, I still
think it is easier for the Pub 2003 and 2007 user to upload the PP
presentation file, or any other .htm file that they might want to 'import'
into an iframe, to a separate folder. I think that if they put it in the
index_files folder which is the default supporting folder for 2003 and 2007,
then there is a good chance of overwriting that support folder and deleting
the file the next time they upload a change to their main web. While if they
created a separate folder at the same directory level, it would keep things
more organized and easier to manage. I also think that for the average user,
writing an absolute link to that file is less error prone. That would change
your code snippet only slightly.
<iframe name="pp"
src="(
http://www.yourdomainname.com/pp-presentation/index.htm)"
width="(workoutthesize in pixels)" height="(workoutthesize in pixels)"
frameborder=0 scrolling=no></iframe>
This assumes that the user created a folder on their site called
'pp-presentation' and they named the pp file 'index.htm' when they converted
it to html. And by using
'
http://www.yourdomainname.com/pp-presentation/index.htm' as the link, this
could be put on the home page or on one of the supporting pages within the
index_files folder and it wouldn't make any difference.
Another caveat. While the extension .html is default in Pub 2000, .htm is
the default in later versions including 2003 and 2007.
So, I am not disagreeing with the form of your iframe or the use of it, but
I just believe that using absolute links vs. relative links are easier for
the average user, and they are less likely to make errors. But to each there
own <g>.
DavidF