incubator-adffaces-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chris Lowe" <chris.lowe...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Skinless
Date Tue, 13 Feb 2007 23:40:50 GMT
Thanks for the info.  So, specifying HTTP cache control headers will work
since this that is an instruction to the browser.  That should save some
hits to the server.

Cheers,

Chris.

On 13/02/07, Adam Winer <awiner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/13/07, Chris Lowe <chris.lowe.uk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Adam,
> >
> > Thanks for the info on the minimal skin, I'll switch to that in the
> > meantime.  An even more minimal skin would be great though - anything to
> > save bandwidth, server hits and browser parsing of CSS/JS will be
> greatly
> > appreciated.
> >
> > My main reasons for not using a skin are cited in my original post.  I'm
> > using making minimal use of the Trinidad component set (using <10
> > components) and having the CSS download seems excessive, plus learning
> about
> > the skinning for my needs was overkill. So for my current project,
> regular
> > CSS suited my needs for positioning and setting simple attributes like
> > width.
> >
> > I completely get the point of skinning and it looks really useful, it's
> just
> > not necessary at the minute.
> >
> > I will be using a compression filter for resources like CSS, I've always
> > found that the following filter does everything I need:
> >
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/pjl-comp-filter/
> >
> > Are there any better ones out there?
> >
> > Are the Trinidad generated CSS/JS files constant between pages?  If so,
> do
> > you see any problem with setting the HTTP cache headers: "Expires" and
> > "Cache-Control" to prevent the browser from requesting these resources
> on
> > each page request?
>
> They're completely constant from page-to-page - though
> not from user-to-user, since we'll send different .css
> for different browsers.
>
> - Adam
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Chris.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 13/02/07, Adam Winer <awiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Skinning is an integral feature, so there's no turning it
> > > off.  You could switch to a simpler l+f - minimal, for instance,
> > > clocks in at <30K.  We could provide an even more minimal l+f,
> > > perhaps.  But, I wonder, why are you looking to completely disable
> > > skinning?
> > >
> > > If it's an issue of download size, you might consider getting
> > > a .gzip filter involved, which will majorly decrease the size
> > > of the .css file (~80% smaller).  The minimal l+f .css comes
> > > in at about 5K once gzip'd.
> > >
> > > -- Adam
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/13/07, Chris Lowe <chris.lowe.uk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Is it possible to switch off skinning altogether?  If so, will
> turning
> > > off
> > > > the skinning prevent the wrapping of various components in SPANs and
> the
> > > > download of a ~140k CSS file?
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Chris.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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