I've seen mobile webkit only caches 20K or smaller files, but not from
official sources, and I suspect cache is probably not going to be very
consistent across browsers.
One of the bigger changes from v2 to v3 is that many modules were
broken away from the 100k+ main.js and make them load on a delayed
base, after the main map type is displayed, or even on-demand when the
module being is used first time.
Ideally the minimal code needed to show the first map type (events
like first "idle","maptypeid_changed") can be packed into one or as
few files as possible to limit the network connection latency, and put
everything else into smaller individual files for better caching and
load them as needed behind the scene.
It will be nice if Google can document the dependency of the modules
and allow more flexibility in loading them for developers.
On Mar 14, 3:15 pm, bratliff <bratl...@umich.edu> wrote:
> On Mar 14, 6:24 pm, Chad Killingsworth
>
> <chadkillingswo...@missouristate.edu> wrote:
> > It's less about bandwidth savings and more about the latency delay caused by
> > individual connections - especially on a mobile device.
>
> > Chad Killingsworth
>
> Hi Chad,
>
> Do you happen to know the cache threshold on the iPhone. I believe
> someone said it was 25K per file. Files exceeding 25K are never
> cached. If true, Google ought to consider the following file sizes:
>
> 59,526 {common,map,overlay}.js
> 16,344 {util}.js
> 19,493 {onion}.js
> 50,071 {controls}.js
> 21,987 {stats,marker}.js
>
> 59,526 {common,map,overlay}.js
> 35,838 {util,onion}.js
> 50,071 {controls}.js
> 2,905 {stats}.js
> 19,081 {marker}.js
>
> "common,map,overlay" can never be cached. With a little bit of
> redistribution of functions, each of the following could be cached.
>
> 31,689 {common}.js
> 26,416 {map}.js
> 1,419 {overlay}.js
>
> Similarly, "util,onion" is too large but the individual files are
> fine. What about "onion,util" ? It is not the same file but the two
> are interchangeable. Clearly, the names are not being sorted.
> Otherwise, "util,onion" would be "onion,util" & "stats,marker" would
> be "marker,stats".
>
> Google ought to offer an option:
>
> &files=combined
> &files=separate
>
> Usage could determine which was popular with developers. I would
> always choose "separate". I suspect others would also.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Google Maps JavaScript API v3" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-maps-js-api-v3@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-maps-js-api-v3+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-js-api-v3?hl=en.
