Live data from Hacker News

Help my website is too small

lukeplant.me.uk

11–15 of 15 posts

Re: Help my website is too small

#12
the whole django site is more than 500KB, the other one more than 300KB.

how is that to small? just because not enough is included in the first http response?

any SPA that doesn't include server side rendering couldn't possibly be any larger as all it does is link to a script that builds the page. and SPA is the modern way to build sites, isn't it? or are you disqualified if your site doesn't support SSR, and the main content is images?

here is an idea for the above two sites: inline all the images and SVGs that will reduce the number of hits and make the page load faster. django should be able to do that. (the encoding of the images will make them a bit larger, but i hope compression can recover most of that).

Re: Help my website is too small

#14
Surprised how such a small website has problems with browser compatibility.

In Safari 15.6.1 (2022), half of the CSS is not loading properly: background color, menu, link colors, and fonts etc.

@layer defaults {

  a:not(.toc-backref) {
   {
      --textDecorationColor: var(--linkDecorationColor);
      text-decoration-color: var(--textDecorationColor);
      text-underline-offset: auto;
      text-decoration-thickness: 0.15rem;
    }

Re: Help my website is too small

#15
I would be curious about this comment at the OP site from yesterday as a proposed or contributing cause for such a mysterious limit, it does carry a ring of adversity via absurdity. I do remember the early days of gzip encoding, many apps suffered from confusion over transport vs. delivered content-length.

"[cratermoon] I did a bit of testing using curl and found that with -H 'Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate, br, zstd' the resulting content-length: 6216 matches the gzipped response. However, without that header the result is not compressed and the response is content-length: 22411. The same difference applies to your other site.

"I wonder if whoever emailed you has crossed up their query and whatever tool they are using is mistakenly complaining because it's expecting 22411 bytes and only getting 6216."

Post reply on HN