![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <da7e68e8.0405221316.446ee440 (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>, lawrence says... http://www.publicdomainsoftware.org/...hp?pageId=1962 What's all that text in the background for? |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> said: Makes the page about 4 to 5 times as heavy as necessary. you can knock off about 85k if you gzip it. |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
brucie wrote: Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> said: Makes the page about 4 to 5 times as heavy as necessary. you can knock off about 85k if you gzip it. Why not using tar.gzip, it's less than 85k. |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
Edwin van der Vaart wrote: brucie wrote: Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> said: Makes the page about 4 to 5 times as heavy as necessary. you can knock off about 85k if you gzip it. Why not using tar.gzip, it's less than 85k. Huh? What use would that be as a Content-Encoding? |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
in post: <news:R8rsc.613$rc2.284@amstwist00 Edwin van der Vaart <picayunish2000 (AT) yahoo (DOT) co.uk> said: Makes the page about 4 to 5 times as heavy as necessary. you can knock off about 85k if you gzip it. Why not using tar.gzip, using a program name to identify encodings is icky poo and i was using "gzip" as a generic term for compression as there are other compression methods/encodings. it's less than 85k. the file is about 96k, if "gziped" (compressed using the gzip encoding) the size of the file sent to the visitors computer is about 10k. |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <da7e68e8.0405221316.446ee440 (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>, lawrence says... http://www.publicdomainsoftware.org/...hp?pageId=1962 What's all that text in the background for? |
#9
| |||
| |||
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |