for what it seems you are in the direction of building an app not a site if that is the case and average load times get bigger consider loading the core functionality javascript first and choose background loading the rest or lazy loading.
if you go beyond that consider a loading notice, if your app provides a lot of functionality then you should consider a loading progress bar or something users will wait for it if they know the app is good. On Mar 6, 2011, at 12:42 PM, Peter Michaux wrote: > On Mar 6, 2:07 am, Jarek Foksa <ja...@kiwi-themes.com> wrote: >> After having investigated several script loaders I decided to go back >> to linking all script files manually in HTML as it's the most reliable >> and straightforward solution. > > I agree no doubt that this is the most reliable and straightforward > solution. > > The situation I can image using dynamically loaded scripts is when the > one-page app starts to get *huge* and there is functionality in the > app that the user will almost never use. The JavaScript and CSS for > that functionality can be loaded if the user does want to use that > functionality. > > I just looked in a reasonably complex page I built. It has 164 kB of > JavaScript in three files. Because Firefox downloads these files in > parallel, I'm seeing download times around 1.5 seconds for these three > files. > > Peter > > -- > To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: > http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@jsmentors.com/ > > To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@googlegroups.com/ > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > jsmentors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com -- To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@jsmentors.com/ To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@googlegroups.com/ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jsmentors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
