esme-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Markus Kohler <>
Subject Re: Client side optimizations
Date Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:32:01 GMT
Hi Anne,
That's good news.
Yes I agree, and I even said myself, that we should probably wait, but I
just couldn't resist to try out the newest version of that tool ;-)

I have no clue, which company you could mean :-]


"The best way to predict the future is to invent it" -- Alan Kay

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Anne Kathrine Petter√łe <> wrote:

> The new UI only has one CSS file.
> I think we should wait with doing client side checks until the new UI is
> up.
> The current UI was only supposed to be there for a short while. The one we
> had before that couldn't be committed to Apache because of IP-issues with a
> certain large company which shall remain unnamed :->
> /Anne
> On 1. des. 2009, at 08.45, Richard Hirsch wrote:
>  I'm hoping that during the new creation of the new UI, we can combine
>> many of these smaller css.
>> Right now we are using the "yuicompressor-maven-plugin" during the
>> build process.
>> D.
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:10 AM, Markus Kohler <>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> Steve Souders web performance evangelist at Google  claimed in his book
>>> (and
>>> elsewhere) that 80% of the time it takes for a web page to load, is on
>>> the
>>> client side. Also I do not agree 100%, I think he has a point.
>>> I did a quick check with PageSpeed (
>>> and it seems we
>>> have
>>> some low hanging fruits to pick. PageSpeed is an amazing Firefox plugin
>>> and
>>> I can only recommend you to run it by yourself as well. It's very
>>> enlightening. I can also send a report to Dick if needed.
>>> It seems esme does not compress all the files it could (and should
>>> compress).
>>> I think compression for static files such as css. has to be configured in
>>> Jetty somewhere, but how does Lift handle compression?
>>> Other improvements could be made be merging several small css file, and
>>> by
>>> running a Javascript compressor.
>>> The newest PageSpeed has support for "Clojure" googles new fancy
>>> javascript
>>> compressor. I wonder how difficult it would be to  put a JS compressor
>>> into
>>> the Build process. Anyone has an idea?
>>> Regards,
>>> Markus
>>> "The best way to predict the future is to invent it" -- Alan Kay

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message