bruant.d at gmail.com
Mon Oct 14 08:20:41 PDT 2013
Le 14/10/2013 15:16, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
> The idea is to use a somewhat more unique separator, e.g. "$sub/". Old
> browsers would simply fetch the URL from the server and if the server
> is written with legacy in mind would serve up the file from there. New
> browsers would realize it's a separator and fetch the URL up to the
> separator and then do addressing within the zip archive once its
> https://gist.github.com/wycats/220039304b053b3eedd0 has a more
> complete summary of our current thinking. (Not entirely up to date.)
I feel this document lacks a "use case/problem/rationale" section. It'd
also be interesting to explore how people solve the same problem today
(inlining mostly) and explain why this proposal is significantly (!)
better (I doubt it is, but I'm always open to being proven wrong).
From what I understand, the problem being solved by bundling is faster
initial load times (feel free to correct me at this point).
Back to something Brendan said:
> I agree with your approach that values ease of content-only (in the
> HTML, via script src= ref=) migration. I think David and others
> pointing to HTTP 2 undervalue that.
Recently, a friend of mine had a performance problem on his blog. It's a
Wordpress blog on an average hosting service, nothing fancy. The landing
page was loading in 14sec. He applied a few tricks (he's not a web dev,
so nothing too fancy), got a CDN wordpress plugin, async-loaded facebook
and other social widgets and now the page loads in 4.5 secs and has
something on screen within about 2sec.
There are 68 requests, 1.2Mb (!) of content downloaded, but it works.
There are also lots of inline scripts in the middle of the page and that
creeps me out and makes me want to murder a couple of people who work on
Wordpress themes... but it works. The web works.
And that's a already semi-complex site. I imagine things to only be
better with content-only websites. How much are we trying to save with
the bundling proposal? 200ms? 300ms? Is it really worth it? I feels like
we're trying to solve a first-world problem.
I feel that before adding new syntax and complexifying yet again the
platform, a thorough performance study should be made to be sure it'll
be significantly better than what we do today with inlining.
More information about the es-discuss