SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 188
  1. #51
    I Use MODx kenquad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    424
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ScallioXTX View Post
    compressing CSS files just isn't worth the trouble
    I have never been able to work up the motivation to even try it. In my case that time would probably be better spent using SmushIt on my jpegs.

  2. #52
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ScallioXTX View Post
    Wait, you mean you know a tool that renames CSS classes and ids in CSS files and updates the HTML in the appropriate places as well?
    i wish. i do a semi-manual job, with search and replace in multiple files. a good text editor is the saviour. but, as i've said earlier in the thread, i'm really thinking about starting to develop such a tool, that will manage all related client side code: html markup, css style, javascript code, by stripping whitespace, cut short the names and so on.

    and i use ie conditional because we had until recently to target specific versions of it and it makes sense once you've done that.

  3. #53
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sega View Post
    Is this Welsh or something. Thinking it's double-dutch .... hehehe
    Actually, it's English... admittedly a thousand years out of date, but it's English.

    The text itself is a quote from Samuel L. Jackson about the the language. In this case I said it because about 2/3rds of every one of noonnope's posts are complete incomprehensible gibberish... Maybe it's the 'too lazy to use the shift key' -- maybe it's the overuse of comma's... maybe it's the lack of actual nouns in half the sentences, but I feel like I need a translator to turn every one of his posts into... English.

  4. #54
    SitePoint Mentor silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    you really haven't seen names for classes or ids or functions like innerOuterSuperDupperThingie then in html and css these are not to shave off just a few bytes.

    if you decide to not change it in the developing version, but live, you are the only one to blame. if you do it once, shame on me. twice... you know the rest. that's why i gave the compiling example: you cannot make changes to the compiled version for languages that compile, you need the source, make changes in it and then recompile it. so it is with html. for me. comments, spaces don't go on production code. our bandwidth is very expensive and nation wide use has its toll.
    I have to say I pretty much agree with the other guys here. I did minify my code once, not saying that you're wrong, maybe you just came from a development-style environment were this come natural to you, so it would not seem such a big issue.

    However, two version of the same file? I did this once for a large website, and it's something which I regretted, managing the site was a headache. Any money saved on a few bytes/kilobytes was spent in man-power recompiling it.

    Some CMS's like Drupal do the minify thing on their own, which means you do not have to get yourself into doing all that.

    How many bytes/kilobytes do you save by doing your minify on your code?

    @deathshadow60
    It's humourous to see you argue at times, but I am afraid you might get in-trouble. It's best if you don't over elaborate on your explanation, as this might cause this brilliant thread to be closed. Plus what you say adds to the discussion.

  5. #55
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    it's about how many kb i don't waste. but the traffic waste is at least 10% down since the production code doesn't have to make sense but to work fast and be as small as it can be. you need to know that caching is not a real option, we are very dynamic in our requirements and the bandwidth is burning our packets, so every save is a big save.

    i'm used to this way, i have a programming background. we can make comments and beatify the code in any way possible on the development part. and also, having this background, we have rules and we don't misplace code, we don't lose it, its never getting lost. i am used to having a source code and a compiled code to take care of. but on the production part things change.

    now, on deployment i have other plans as well, but those don't fit but in an intranet

  6. #56
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    it's about how many kb i don't waste. but the traffic waste is at least 10% down since the production code doesn't have to make sense but to work fast and be as small as it can be. you need to know that caching is not a real option, we are very dynamic in our requirements and the bandwidth is burning our packets, so every save is a big save.
    Well, as I said I don't recall (nor can I find evidence of) you inviting me to see that, and I'd really like to.

    Call me skeptical, but If you are having monstrous throughput issues where white-space is making enough of a difference to actually reach 10%, your problems probably run a LOT deeper than you think -- given that even on the smallest of codebases the amount white-space stripping should provide in bandwidth shouldn't be more than 1% the page total (including objects, images, etc) BEFORE compression. I would suspect presentational markup, classes on elements that don't need classes, outdated markup techniques... just from everything else you are saying about it and my experience whenever this comes up.

    I mean, what's your CTC ratio? If it IS clean (3:1 or less BEFORE gzip), I'd be shocked given everything else you've said about it!

  7. #57
    SitePoint Mentor silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    it's about how many kb i don't waste. but the traffic waste is at least 10% down since the production code doesn't have to make sense but to work fast and be as small as it can be
    This would really have to be a very big site to be worth all this trouble. In any other normal scenario I cannot see this working, I certainly would not bother for a 8 page website. From your point of view it must be worth it, and it will probably save you a lot of money so ye, I can see this working for you.

    When you said that the classes do not have to make sense, were you serious? I mean would you code something like ".w1{}", instead of give it a meaningful name. How would one do this without getting lost? I don't suppose you would have automated software to cope with this kind of process, or would this simply be a process of doing find-replace a series of times? How would I know what class w1 is, I would probably need some kind of name-sheet.

    Just to get an idea here, how many pages does one of these sites have? How many visits per month? And how much bandwidth?

  8. #58
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    @ds60: man, you really are beating the dead horse

    i've told you. intranet not internet. no invitation if not employed.

    whitespace + long names used for the normal and easy readability of the developing code = a lot of waste. hence, cut these down in the production code. keep the best of both worlds. images are not common. we don't have a use for them. intranet. fewer the better.

    i was fighting with you on the rounded corners exactly about that: wrapping empty divs for presentation. now you come and tell me: "I would suspect presentational markup, classes on elements that don't need classes, outdated markup techniques... just from everything else you are saying about it and my experience whenever this comes up." come on


    @Sega: one site, in which team i am, probably has about 60 or so, i never counted, they grow every 2-3 months. and yes, on the production they are 1-3 chars long. that's why on the developing code we can afford innerOuterBrighterDarkerThingieBingie and that's why i'm thinking to make a project, probably in java, to fully automate this. it will give me a chance to tackle java for real

    no visitors: users. no internet, intranet. how many users per hour you mean!

    but i guess if you look at google's page code, you'll see the same thing.

  9. #59
    SitePoint Mentor silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    @noonnope

    I understand what you're doing, and I understand it must be saving you guys money. But to me it seems very complicated from the management front. How would one know what .wa1 is? Is there automatic compile software out there that can deal with this?

    You probably compress everything to one line too, alongside with this naming format.

    Personally for me, your method would not be feasible, but I can see it working on a huge website quite easily.

    Forgive me, like most here we keep thinking in terms of websites, so forget my users question. Would your method work for a large internet website? In theory it should.

    However, I have not witnesses many sites using your method.

  10. #60
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You know, I always laugh when people contradict themselves THIS badly:

    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    i've told you. intranet not internet. no invitation if not employed.
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    and you've already declined once my invitation to show you mine, remember?
    So which is it?!? Sorry, but you've basically just flushed ANY credibilty down the toilet on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    no visitors: users. no internet, intranet. how many users per hour you mean!
    Which means your knowledge of deployment for the Internet means jack. Helps explain why almost EVERYTHING you've said is the exact opposite of common sense for INTERNET deployment. Hell, since you're talking Intranet crapplets do you even have to THINK about cross browser? That would mean you could say "everyone that works for us uses THIS browser, don't like it, there's the door" which would explain a HELL of a lot about the stuff you've been saying.

    Though again, I highly suspect that given what you've said, your code is problematic and riddled with bloat... but of course since you're all secretive about that, we are all left to guess. What's a matter? Afraid we'll see the truth?

    Hell, just give us a page snippet and do a replace on the content with dummy content (of the same bytecount, please, no cheating) -- that way we can all either laugh at you, or bow down to your greatness depending on what we see. To put it in the modern vernacular, Tits or GTFO -- that's a joke.

    The markup ALONE could speak volumes your Engrish cannot. Again, to ask a simple question, what's your CTC ratio on the markup, and overall for the code, both before and after whitespace compression. Easy numbers to calculate (gimme a URL, it takes 30 seconds). If markup-wise it's more than 3:1, and if overall it's more than 8:1, your problems run pretty deep.

  11. #61
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    @Sega

    i think that even smaller sites would benefit. and think about mobile. yes, you lose readability. who cares, you don't teach "how to write understandable html", you offer a no nonsense web page. the ones who care enough should be educated enough to be able to read that code.

  12. #62
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    You know, I always laugh when people contradict themselves THIS badly[...]
    So which is it?!? Sorry, but you've basically just flushed ANY credibilty down the toilet on that.
    i never invited you to one of our intranet sites. if i wish i couldn't, you know, because of the routers i invited you though to a coding contest about rounded corners, here, on sp, but you never answered back. still don't remember? it's ok, i don't mind


    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Which means your knowledge of deployment for the Internet means jack. Helps explain why almost EVERYTHING you've said is the exact opposite of common sense for INTERNET deployment. Hell, since you're talking Intranet crapplets do you even have to THINK about cross browser? That would mean you could say "everyone that works for us uses THIS browser, don't like it, there's the door" which would explain a HELL of a lot about the stuff you've been saying.
    no, that means that you think my knowledge of deployment for the Internet means jack. it's ok also

    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Though again, I highly suspect that given what you've said, your code is problematic and riddled with bloat... but of course since you're all secretive about that, we are all left to guess. What's a matter? Afraid we'll see the truth?

    Hell, just give us a page snippet and do a replace on the content with dummy content (of the same bytecount, please, no cheating) -- that way we can all either laugh at you, or bow down to your greatness depending on what we see.

    The markup ALONE could speak volumes your Engrish cannot.
    this is really childish of you

  13. #63
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    this is really childish of you
    What, asking for PROOF of your wild nonsensical claims?

    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    i never invited you to one of our intranet sites. if i wish i couldn't, you know, because of the routers
    Tense man, learn how to use tense.

    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    i invited you though to a coding contest about rounded corners, here, on sp, but you never answered back.
    Oddly, I thought I was the one who said that -- since you NEVER actually produced working code for it! I was still waiting for you to produce something that actually involved code and worked! Until then, there was nothing to even respond TO.

    You talk the talk, but without once EVER providing code examples to actually back up your claims your not walking the walk! In fact, if that was the thread in question I believe I called you out on that one as well for the exact same reason. "Oh I could do it better" -- ok hotshot, then DO IT and SHOW US IT!

  14. #64
    SitePoint Mentor silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    @Sega

    i think that even smaller sites would benefit. and think about mobile. yes, you lose readability. who cares, you don't teach "how to write understandable html", you offer a no nonsense web page. the ones who care enough should be educated enough to be able to read that code.
    Can you elaborate?

    The time taken to manage this would be a nightmare?

    How do you manage those kind of class names?

    It's clear in it's compressed format nobody would be able to understand this kind of code.

    Mobiles would clearly benefit but I have not really looked into those. Kind of waiting for them to catch up with us before I delve into that.

  15. #65
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    @ds60

    you must remember, i asked you're permission to use your code to make my case. you never answered back. and it was also because you were acting the same childish way

  16. #66
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    @ds60

    you must remember, i asked you're permission to use your code to make my case. you never answered back. and it was also because you were acting the same childish way
    Link or it didnt' happen. I just re-read that thread and can't find that anywhere either... though once again maybe I just failed to understand your broken engrish.

    Of course, asking for proof or examples is instantly being childish -- right. Gah, feel like I'm dealing with a theist. "I have my proof I don't have to show it to you..."

    ... and I'm the one being 'childish'.

  17. #67
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    @Sega

    what i've said all along: the code you have now it's like the code for development. i do some additional work to cut its size down by using a technique known as minify, and to simulate what a compiler does for you: it renames variable names, class names, function names etc. kinda what jQuery is looking like.

    if the process was fully automated, which i have on my mind to do, then yes, in its "compressed" form would make less sense. but all connections would be kept between the three layers: html, css, js, and you'll have to always use for mods the dev version. any mods.

  18. #68
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    @ds60


    keep looking. it's not that one. and you know you are being childish

  19. #69
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sega View Post
    Can you elaborate?
    You missed what he's saying -- which is maintaining two copies - a verbose non-stripped one you do all your edits/maintennance on, and a stripped one you deploy. What is typically called a "production" copy and a "deployment" copy.

    IF you have sufficient control over the project and are not deploying it in the wild (like as something other people can use on the internet) and are only restricting it in-house where you KNOW the 'production' copy is always available, what he's saying is sustainable. It just falls apart for internet deployment -- at least if you are working for a client and it's not some little personal project. Sustainability of that practice comes down to the scope of the project -- and since apparently everything noonnope does is intranet related... it's no shock it doesn't make a whole lot of sense with the larger target base.

    But for some wierd reason with his use of English, much like the rest of his gibberish he seems to think "copy" always means a 1:1 exact match -- which of course it does not. Copy can be degraded, changed, etc.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/copy

    Just chalk up the misunderstanding to an entirely different understanding of what words mean and how they are used.

  20. #70
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thank you ds60, you are offering a concise and in a proper english articulation explanation i could never do. but i do my best although i have to say it could also be used for internet deployment. site's code doesn't have to be pretty. you don't introduce the code, you introduce the content to visitors and users.

  21. #71
    SitePoint Mentor silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    You missed what he's saying -- which is maintaining two copies - a verbose non-stripped one you do all your edits/maintennance on, and a stripped one you deploy. What is typically called a "production" copy and a "deployment" copy.
    I understand that their is two copies, but it's still a nightmare to manage. I don't know of any automated software that would rename your classes to .wa1 etc and shrink your code.

    I used minify on the site, and in some processes my code did not work properly afterwards. It altered the appearance, particularly with hovers and buttons.

    I know you probably save some space, but saying this, the risks are too high. I have had many instances when I lost the clients html site, and because I had the original html online I saved myself some potential problems.

    There are ways to reverse this minify, or compression process, but it's never guaranteed, and it's almost like playing with fire.

    Edit: If I wrote my code with .wa1 etc. I certainly won't be able to know what's going on, so writing this natively would be out of the question
    Last edited by Sega; Sep 16, 2010 at 18:14. Reason: More Information

  22. #72
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    no, it's like real programming. even though html doesn't compile, and even though such an automated software doesn't exist yet, a correctly done minify on all html, css, js code would never alter the appeareance, that's just silly.

    and in real programming reverse engineering it's harder than reversing the minify, but still, programmers manage when disaster strikes

    edit: but you can see on your developing code version what's all about. your production code will look like .wa1 etc.

  23. #73
    SitePoint Mentor silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    and in real programming reverse engineering it's harder than reversing the minify, but still, programmers manage when disaster strikes
    Is this the kind of website you mean - http://willpeavy.com/minifier/
    and this - http://www.cssdrive.com/index.php/main/csscompressor

    I did use those sites, but like I said, I cannot write natively .wa1 etc. and know what I mean. These programs also tamper with your code, making it do weird things.

  24. #74
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sega View Post
    I used minify on the site, and in some processes my code did not work properly afterwards. It altered the appearance, particularly with hovers and buttons.
    Which matches my experience with it. Quite often optimizers, especially when it comes to the HTML, fail to understand that your CSS might be displaying a block-level tag as display:inline, and by stripping the white-space it changes the formatting.

    It's one of the things I mean when I badmouth dreamweaver -- quite often you load the code I've written into dreamweaver, make NO changes and just hit 'save' and it breaks the layout... Minify type scripts, especially if applied to markup can break things even worse!

    I've even seen cases where it breaks pages because it removed comments though as I point out time and time again, that's entirely the habit of putting the comment after a closing tag instead of before it where in FF it will sometimes act like a BR (script tag had the same issue in one version of FF IIRC) and in IE if the comment ends up between floats you've got the double-render or dissapearing content bugs... Which is funny because then minify would actually FIX IE while breaking FF.

    I love laughing at the people who end up resorting to IE conditional comments for IE7 when all they have to do to fix the page is either remove the comments or move them INSIDE the element they are for instead of between sibling elements.

    Or the take the old trick of putting a comment inside a empty tag so you can set any height on it in IE... mind you that trick can now be replaced with font-size:1px; -- but it's another example of something minifying the markup can totally screw up.

    CSS on the other hand should NOT break due to minification/whitespace stripping because it has clear rules and isn't white-space sensitive... though make sure you put the ; at the end of every declaration as for example:

    width:180px}

    Breaks in some browsers, though damned if I can remember which ones. (might not even be true anymore, I think that was some 1.x version of Gecko that had a regression?!?)

    Again, headaches... and in the case of CSS, is it REALLY worth 2 or 3 bytes per line of code on average in the grand scheme of things?

  25. #75
    SitePoint Mentor silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Again, headaches... and in the case of CSS, is it REALLY worth 2 or 3 bytes per line of code on average in the grand scheme of things?
    In my opinion I have to say no, it seems like a lot of trouble, and even with CSS code minify will have a negative affect on the functionality of the code (it does tamper with the code). I know with HTML is just messed everything up.

    I am wondering how one would use this minify thing constructively, or if there is something I am missing. Maybe there is a plug-in which is full proof. The website's however do a pretty bad job.

    I keep saying this, I cannot natively write .wa1 as a class in my code, and understand what it means. I would need a description sheet, it would be a nightmare!

    Dreamweaver is something that anybody who knows his code can do without. Just to illustrate I don't even have Dreamweaver.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •