So minimal... So inefficient...
There's a reason we do image, css and javascript includes in HTML. This idea undoes all that.
I can't imagine why the author, clearly a bright guy, went out of his way to build this thing.
There's a reason we do image, css and javascript includes in HTML. This idea undoes all that.
I can't imagine why the author, clearly a bright guy, went out of his way to build this thing.
BTW, everything is separated before publishing. CSS is one file, reset CSS is in another, there is a HTML template etc. Easy maintenance off line, online and published does not matter. It is similar with dynamic publishing.
As for the inefficiency we all know HTTP requests are the biggest enemy. All my pages are exactly one request. With everything being minimized, gzipped and unused CSS selectors stripped I do not see how this can be more 'inefficient'.
I understand the fully-packed 1 request situation is great for serve-time and page-rank, and after it is all said and done its probably the better solution. This is a slippery slope though because its possible to do too much of that and not enough real work.
The bigger the site, lesser the point in all of this (and harder). It is a small personal site and I enjoyed the process of doing all of this. Makefile is nice to have in the end, which means it was a one time investment.
Unless you have it set up in a certain way - it does require one more step. When you save the content you still have to run the makefile and then upload it. Even though this could be done in a batch script, just looking at the problem you are trying to solve (run a personal site/blog), it seems rather over-complicated.
The virtue and delivery of the idea is cool though - never discounted that. I just wanted to play devil's advocate on the practicality - which you seem to agree that it isn't really practical.
It can also be integrated with DVCS post-hooks.
As it stands, you're re-sending all your images and all your css and all your javascript to every one of your users every time they ask for a page on your site. So if I like your blog and read 50 articles, you've sent me that stuff 50 times over.
If you come to my site and flip through 50 pages, you'll get one css file, seven images, and one javascript file from the first page you request, all minified, gzipped and compressed just like yours is. The only difference being those extra requests, which might end up faster overall since they're to a CDN endpoint at your end of whatever continent you're on.
For the next 49 requests, all you get is content.
For bigger advanced sites, yes, you are right.
Up to certain point, this is 'better', from the certain point, it is not.
Still it's very cool, especially for a minimalist blog.