Hi, Is there a reason why we are serving a massive bunch of CSS and javascript files with Sogo, rather than combining them? If there is no need for them to be normally customised for the installation, then can we not distribute a combined minified set of files instead?
Just clustering by licence type/use would bring a huge decrease in the number of assets requested. Also I tried running big lumps of js through the Closure compiler and it packs down very well. For example the entire UIx*.js is 244KB, but after running through closure and gzip this gets down to 24KB (smaller than many of the individual files). All the HTML*.js files pack down to around 1.7KB. Tablekit*.js packs down to a few hundred bytes. etc. It would also be nice to use CSS for the toolbar images (use a sprite, and set various image offsets as the visible image). This saves us HTML size (speed) and makes it easier to restyle/theme (cachable). However, the way the current HTML is arranged doesn't make it simple to submit a patch. Not indended to be a critique, just wondering if there is a reason things are the way they are? (Since the alternative seems straightforward to implement?) Note, I do set my webserver to add Expires headers to all the assets, so the client will cache, however, initial load time is the name of the game for satisfied users? Yahoo/Google do some browser plugins which assess how well sites achieve this kind of optimisation - simple stuff, but well worth investigating Thanks for any thoughts Ed W -- [email protected] https://inverse.ca/sogo/lists
