Sent by Alan K Baker on 6 May 2008 17:05
This is one of those 'Horses for Courses' arguments.
Having been a programmer in machine code which had to fit onto 1K (yes 1K !!!) ROMs, I've been used
to "byte fighting" and I've seen so called code optimisers, which have never been as good as the
human hand.
These days, life's much easier, but unfortunately, space-wasting has led to bloatware.
You have to consider what the end result is to be. Is your code likely to be downloaded by folks on
slow dial-up? How much code have you generated and what is the actual file size? What is the ratio
of image files to text, on the site in question?
Does it really matter if your visitors have to wait for a page to load? To answer that question, I
cite the example of what has happened on my latest project over the last day or so. I was having
problems with IE6 not always displaying large images and after discussion with Georg, I decided that
it was a timeout problem due to IE6 taking too long to calculate sizes. I then defined all of the
sizes for some 50 or so jpegs into the CSS, which increased the file size somewhat. It had the
desired effect and instead of the increased CSS slowing things down, the benefits were remarkable.
(Thanks Georg).
If the site is proliferated by image files then cutting down the text (white space) will not make a
significant difference and because most CSS files are relatively small in size, I don't really
believe white space removal is worth the bother.
You can of course use TABs to do your code formatting, which will reduce the byte count somewhat, or
use an optimiser after you've finished writing your code, or one that runs on the server side.
TBQH If someone asks for help on this forum and their code is sloppily formatted or compressed, I
find that disrespectful to the person being asked for help, and if I'm tight for time, I would think
twice before trying to read it.
My vote's with 'Smashing'. :-)
Regards,
Alan.
www.theatreorgans.co.uk
www.virtualtheatreorgans.com
Admin: ConnArtistes, UKShopsmiths, 2nd Touch & A-P groups
Shopsmith 520 + bits
Flatulus Antiquitus
----- Original Message -----
From: Amrinder
To: CSS Discuss
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 2:48 PM
Subject: [css-d] :: CSS Code Readibility ::
l in size
Hi,
I was reading this article on Smashing Magazine which shows how to increase code readability,
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/05/02/improving-code-readability-with-css-styleguides/
but I have listened to Andy Clarke over Lynda.com saying that one should save the white space as
it increases the file size.
Which approach is better? Should we go for code readability as described by Smashing Magazine or
follow what Andy said.
Thanks,
Amrinder
Freelance Web-Standard Designer
www.awayback.com
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
