@eskimoblood: I totally understand what you mean. During TV.com's redesign, I was the lead producer (front end dood) so I enjoy the positive and negative feedback. I know compression and comment-removal is the way to go. I had the plan to get it started, since you'll notice most of the css and js files are .src.css and .src.js. Sadly, after the redesign, the web property is now being handled by another team and I don't know if they ever plan on compressing the files.
You said "both they use it in a very bad way". Could you point some of those out on TV.com? I'm trying to take your comments as constructive criticism, cause everything can be or is a learning experience. Thanks! On Nov 9, 3:55 am, eskimoblood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But take a look at the source, both they use it in a very bad way. > TV.com also used all files in uncompressed and commented version. It > looks like they see some fancy effect and thought, oh that's such a > cool accordion lets download mootools. That's not the way a framework > should be used. I know its hard to refactory your old 90's scripts but > you should to this. > > On 9 Nov., 12:01, Garrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > That's pretty awesome to know. TV.com does too..
