Jazajay
Active Member
A) Yes external files get cached which cut bandwidth and speed up page performance.
B) Again yes but think about organizing it a bit better if you need more pages add them.
C) Sorry Harry, Harry won't like me any more from what i'm about to say BUT.....computer programs don't need well structured code, that being whitespace to split areas up, they don't need long id names and by adding them all you are doing is adding more bytes to the page which then slows the page down as they have to be downloaded. That is why rather than coding like this ~
<div id="wrapper">
<div id="header"></div>
<div id="main-content"></div>
<div id="footer"></div>
</div>
I code like this ~
<div id="w1">
<div id="w2"></div>
<div id="w3"></div>
<div id="w4"></div>
</div>
And try to make no id longer than 3 characters. That way I cut out 23 pointless characters, use b instead of strong a few times that then means I've just cut another 93 useless characters. Use that convention on all id's and class names and there's another hundred useless characters gone, all of which don't need to be downloaded thus improves page load times, saves server strain and saves you bandwidth.
As I then know that Wx refers to a certain section it then becomes easier to know what means what.
But I imagine Harry will tell you that's bad but at the end of the day naming conventions any other way than for the computer program itself IMO is just bad and because most web devs can't get there head round a much simpler and more efficient system they use a fool proof approach.
Not that I'm saying ppl who use less efficient ways to code are fools, just wrong IMO as it is not as efficient as it should be. Ppl need names, computers/browsers don't.
Now lets see how much stick I get, I'll be disappointed if that doesn't bait Harry as he's a man of principle.
Jaz
Key:
Dark slate blue ~ XHTML
B) Again yes but think about organizing it a bit better if you need more pages add them.
C) Sorry Harry, Harry won't like me any more from what i'm about to say BUT.....computer programs don't need well structured code, that being whitespace to split areas up, they don't need long id names and by adding them all you are doing is adding more bytes to the page which then slows the page down as they have to be downloaded. That is why rather than coding like this ~
<div id="wrapper">
<div id="header"></div>
<div id="main-content"></div>
<div id="footer"></div>
</div>
I code like this ~
<div id="w1">
<div id="w2"></div>
<div id="w3"></div>
<div id="w4"></div>
</div>
And try to make no id longer than 3 characters. That way I cut out 23 pointless characters, use b instead of strong a few times that then means I've just cut another 93 useless characters. Use that convention on all id's and class names and there's another hundred useless characters gone, all of which don't need to be downloaded thus improves page load times, saves server strain and saves you bandwidth.
As I then know that Wx refers to a certain section it then becomes easier to know what means what.
But I imagine Harry will tell you that's bad but at the end of the day naming conventions any other way than for the computer program itself IMO is just bad and because most web devs can't get there head round a much simpler and more efficient system they use a fool proof approach.
Not that I'm saying ppl who use less efficient ways to code are fools, just wrong IMO as it is not as efficient as it should be. Ppl need names, computers/browsers don't.
Now lets see how much stick I get, I'll be disappointed if that doesn't bait Harry as he's a man of principle.
Jaz
Key:
Dark slate blue ~ XHTML
