Folks, I just added <lift:tail> builtin snippet support. <script> and <link> tags are treated differently in terms of duplicates checking such as a scripts with the same src will not be rendered more then once. Same thing applies for link and href attribute. Same dups criteria are applied for head merge as head merge did not handle certain cases. Duplicates between head and tail contents though are not determined.
Should you have any questions/suggestions/comments, please let me know. Br's, Marius On May 11, 10:37 am, Viktor Klang <viktor.kl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 10:39 PM, marius d. <marius.dan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 10, 10:08 pm, Viktor Klang <viktor.kl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > What I've been noodling about for some time is to have dependency > > management > > > as a part of the framework. That could be easily obtained by having > > widgets > > > etc register their dependencies in a SessionVar[List[Dependency]] and > > then > > > simply add a DispatchPF to serve those dependencies as one package with > > the > > > separate GET. > > > So what would this solve? ... I mean there is the ResourceServer used > > currently by widgets so that widget's dependencies to be served ... > > perhaps I'm missing something? > > Nevermind; I'll see if I can make a PoC using ResourceServer. > > > > > > > > The downsides I've come up with are: > > > > * Adds a reasonable amount of complexity > > > * The order of the dependencies is hard to get right > > > * Premature optimization > > > * Moves away from idea to have JS libraries served by third party hosts > > > * Kind of defeats the purpose of caching JS > > > > Just my 2 cents, > > > Viktor > > > > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Timothy Perrett <timo...@getintheloop.eu > > >wrote: > > > > > Yeah google analytics is a good use case. I think talking about > > > > smashing static files is off topic, but there is some value in having > > > > a tail merge for when you want to put stuff in just before the body > > > > tag. My only thinking right now is that why do we need a specific > > > > snippet to do this? Right now, <lift-tag:bind> and <lift-tag:with- > > > > param> would work perfectly for this right? > > > > > Cheers, Tim > > > > > On May 10, 3:21 pm, "Bryan." <germ...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > A nice use for this "tail merge" would be for the Google Analytics > > > > > tracking code, especially the ecommerce tracking code. > > > > > > Here's something to keep an eye on as well: > >http://blog.digg.com/?p=621 > > > > > -- still very new and in development. > > > > > > --Bryan > > > > > > On May 10, 9:57 am, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 6:55 AM, marius d. < > > marius.dan...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > People can choose to "smash" multiple js/css files into a single > > one, > > > > > > > in fact it is a common practice. However for scripts that can be > > > > > > > deferred putting them at the bottom of the page can improve > > > > rendering. > > > > > > > Okay.. so we're not actually putting the scripts on the page, we're > > > > just > > > > > > putting them right about the </body> tag? > > > > > > > > Br's, > > > > > > > Marius > > > > > > > > On May 10, 4:42 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Timothy Perrett > > > > <timo...@getintheloop.eu > > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Sounds like this could be a neat addition. Looking forward to > > see > > > > what > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > come up with :-) > > > > > > > > > I'm not 100% keen on it. Loading a ton of stuff into the HTML > > page > > > > > > > (rather > > > > > > > > than having stuff cached by the browser) makes for larger page > > > > sizes. > > > > > > > I'd > > > > > > > > much rather see a tool that would analyze the scripts and css > > that > > > > was > > > > > > > > included across lots of pages and recommending to the developer > > to > > > > make > > > > > > > 10 > > > > > > > > CSS files or 20 script files into 1. But that's just me. > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, Tim > > > > > > > > > > On 08/05/2009 20:19, "marius d." <marius.dan...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A <lift:tail> built in snippet might me a good addition. I > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > probably allocate some time to noodle on it. > > > > > > > > > > > Br's, > > > > > > > > > > Marius > > > > > > > > > > > On May 8, 5:05 pm, KWright <kev.lee.wri...@googlemail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> It's becoming an established best practice that scripts > > should > > > > be > > > > > > > put > > > > > > > > > >> at the END of a page, where possible, in order to speed up > > > > download > > > > > > > > > >> times > > > > > > > > > > >> Good article here: > > > >http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/rules.html > > > > > > > > > > >> It would be nice if Lift could help encourage and support > > this > > > > by > > > > > > > > > >> allowing a <tail> (or <Lift:tail>?) element that could be > > > > merged in > > > > > > > > > >> the same fashion as the head element, perhaps also > > removing > > > > > > > > > >> duplicates, etc. > > > > > > > > > > >> This element would then disappear and expose only its > > content > > > > when > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > >> page is ultimately sent to the browser. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Lift, the simply functional web frameworkhttp://liftweb.net > > > > > > > > Beginning Scalahttp://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 > > > > > > > > Follow me:http://twitter.com/dpp > > > > > > > > Git some:http://github.com/dpp > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Lift, the simply functional web frameworkhttp://liftweb.net > > > > > > Beginning Scalahttp://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 > > > > > > Follow me:http://twitter.com/dpp > > > > > > Git some:http://github.com/dpp > > > > -- > > > Viktor Klang > > > Senior Systems Analyst > > -- > Viktor Klang > Senior Systems Analyst --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
