On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
* Removes a few RTTs for non-pipelining clients
Do you mean to imply that there's such a thing as a pipelining client
on the real web? (Okay, okay, Opera.) This concern seems like it
outweighs all the others put together pretty handily -- especially for
script files that aren't at the end, which block page loading.
* Automatically create CSS sprites?
That would be neat, but perhaps a bit tricky.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Platonides <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Also take into account on the javascript redesign,
javascript wiki-side
extensions.
[[MediaWiki:Common.js]] importScripts [[MediaWiki:Wikiminiatlas.js]],
[[MediaWiki:niceGalleries.js]] and [[MediaWiki:buttonForRFA.js]], which
then load [[MediaWiki:buttonForRFA/lang.js]]... plus the several Gadgets
the user may have enabled.
On Wikimedia Commons I load 38 scripts located at the MediaWiki
namespace (plus gen=js).
I'm pretty sure loading all of them when they aren't in the cache slows
it much more than the organization of the core mediawiki javascript.
Hmm, yeah. This scheme needs to support combining admin-added
JavaScript, unless we can convince everyone to just put everything in
Common.css. Maybe we could support some sort of transclusion
mechanism for JS files -- like rather than serving JS pages raw, MW
first substitutes templates (but nothing else)?
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Tei <oscar.vives(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I see that ImageMagick can combine images in a single
one.
A single image mean a single hit to a Apache, so it only have to spawn once.
On the clientside, a single image can draw multiple elements with some
ninja CSS stuff. ( background-position?).
For such thing to be possible to a MediaWiki skins, do changes are needed?.
This is image spriting, which Tim mentioned as a possibility. It's
not a big issue for us right now because we use so few images, and
images don't block page parsing or rendering, but it might be worth
considering eventually.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Platonides <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think it fits our normal image usage into
the pages. Could be
tried for the images used by the skins. Although I would worry about
support for that CSS on legacy browsers.
Image spriting is very well-studied and works in all browsers of
import. It's used by all the fancy high-performance sites, like
Google:
http://www.google.com/images/nav_logo7.png
It would be nice if we didn't have to go to such lengths to hack
around the fact that HTTP pipelining is broken, wouldn't it?