<...> > Updated valid page, based on the above: > http://xomerang.com/testpages/google/validGoogle.html (1,953 bytes) >
Ok I took your version and got it to extreme: http://rimantas.com/bits/google/google1.html (1729 bytes). What I did: got rid of some optional tags, shortened name of CSS file to one letter ( one may save four more bytes by removing extension); got rid of redundant META element (that info belongs to server config), removed widht and height from IMG: there is now use in this case to have them. Still valid HTML strict: http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//rimantas.com/bits/google/google1.html > I retained the one-line Javascript in the head, but all styles are in > an external CSS file: > http://xomerang.com/testpages/google/validGoogle.css (636 bytes) > > So even for a one-off request, with no cached CSS, the valid version > is 2589 bytes - *still* lighter weight than the current invalid > version. One gotcha here: even in cached stylesheet case there is some chat going between browser and server, and it usually amounts in the range between 0.5 and 1KB. (http://rimantas.com/bits/google/headers.txt) So, for small javascript and CSS it may be better to have them in html, in case every byte counts. There is version with embeded CSS (I did not try to optimaze styles, taken as-is): http://rimantas.com/bits/google/google.html Size is 2361 bytes, but about 600 bytes of traffic are saved by having one HTTP request less. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
