Mailing-List: contact bloodhound-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJSKAsgU76Bf0YY5PzdFPsRHGpmzvpf+q2MjSXwV+oS=x_=sPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAJSKAsijOt3s4SX2kRM925CH1+G-oYafBqBMjRzpXvrZ0z6iHg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGMZAuN65PGNQii2zoaT95Rok0Seg3-+_EQohPWgPTNtk99wCg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50B9B90C.2000507@wandisco.com>
	<CAGMZAuNAvcKpxUgp+7UqmjhK9bHangRBmHTB-W60CDp7C0UW7w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJSKAsgU76Bf0YY5PzdFPsRHGpmzvpf+q2MjSXwV+oS=x_=sPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:11:22 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAJSKAshg_CxVKE4b3ot51Vmz6SSrEvTZVmWYxamhnhTntU1aCw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Browser, HTML and JS support
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Ko=C5=BEelj?= <peter@digiverse.si>
To: bloodhound-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e0cb4efa6dead28a5604cff1a5e5

--e0cb4efa6dead28a5604cff1a5e5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

> in some sense I'm one of the users often on non-JS mode since I have
> to disable JS from time to time to make web sites load faster ...
> considering the fact that sometimes my internet connection becomes a
> PITA , btw .
>

Interesting, how does disabling JS make site load faster? The only way I
imagine is by not loading some of the stuff? Which BH should serve you in a
different form anyway?

I would argue that well designed and well implemented JS centric web
application is much faster than a classic (server-side generated HTML with
mixed representation and data) one. JS and pure static HTML can be cached
in browser while only compressed data can be exchanged over the wire which
should be much smaller and it is even done asynchronously which benefits
slow bandwidth high latency network users way more that to users blessed
with optics plugged on the other side of their wall.

--e0cb4efa6dead28a5604cff1a5e5--