Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gmuslera 335 days ago
The main thing I remember from an usability book by Jakob Nielsen is that web pages should fit in 50kb, including all elements. Managing to do this in only 2x that size today, considering that his book was from 1999, may be considered a merit.

To put this into another context, today there was a post about Slack's 404 page weighting 50Mb.
1 comments
toss1 335 days ago
There used to be a contest to fit a good web page into 5kB [0]. Seems it stopped running in 2002, to be replaced by a 10kB contest.

Evidently, the entire concept of size & communications efficiency has been abandoned

[0] https://www.the5k.org/about.php

link
AdieuToLogic 335 days ago
> There used to be a contest to fit a good web page into 5kB ...

In accordance with this philosophy, I worked on a project a couple years ago where the HTML home page uncompressed size was intentionally limited to 4k. The idea being a slow network connection (such as a mobile device using a limited cellular connection) would be able to render quickly and remaining content could load asynchronously.

link
toss1 335 days ago
I wish everyone would do the same!
link
fuzzfactor 334 days ago
How about having a page consisting of pure html, less than 0.5kb, with the server only providing content alone (simple, one mp4), but serving you none of the html?

So it even works when there is no page on the web at all :0

In that case your browser only needs to load 0kb of html from the web in order to successfully reach the page.

That can be pretty fast. Either way. 0.5kb is real small but 0kb is a bit smaller ;)

Fairly elementary, all you're wanting to do is access some media which is found on the web itself at a known address.

But there's a catch, you would have to supply the html "landing page" file yourself from your own PC if none of the html's going to be coming in from the web to your browser.

Here it is:

   <!doctype html><html lang=en><meta charset="utf-8" />
        <style type="text/css">
   body {background-color:#0000ff; color:#ffffff; font-size:28px; text-align:center;}
        </style>

        <br /><br /><br />
   Fuzzfactor Minimal Player
        <br /><br /><br />

        <video controls
   src="https://archive.org/download/BigBuckBunny_124/Content/big_buck_bunny_720p_surround.mp4"
        type="video">
        </video>

        <br /><br />
   big_buck_bunny_720p_surround.mp4
        <br />

        </html>
Copy and paste the code into a text editor, save file as fuzzplayer.txt into your favorite folder, then save it again as fuzzplayer.html, right there in the same folder. To edit in the future, double-click on the TXT version to edit, double save again as both file types when done. Double-click the identical html version (identical to txt except for file extension) to launch your browser and go to "my" page where you can play the media. Not much differently than the Mozilla example does.

"Header" (not formally), three "paragraphs" (without paragraph marks), EOF.

Backward indenting for me, old (without) school I guess.

Pretty straightforward

Almost everything indented except things that you might want to change more easily in the future. Then you can just go down the left margin and kill 'em all or take pot shots.

Page formatting is associated with a block of displayed text in preference to other objects. This is the indented html formatting which is quite likely to need some future editing, very often in concert with the text itself, so it's good to have it right there. Almost seems like some html belongs without indentation also but that kind of defeats the purpose of the "clean" look. You get used to it.

Editing 5kb or 10kb of this kind of stuff manually, covering all the bases in a couple minutes, and having it work the first time can make you smile more than a lot of things :)

link