4 ms·

It's hard to believe that a site with that kind of traffic & resources hasn't even bothered to concatenate and minify its JS & CSS. Most of the JS files still h

by STRML 14y ago

It's hard to believe that a site with that kind of traffic & resources hasn't even bothered to concatenate and minify its JS & CSS. Most of the JS files still have comments. Bizarre. They should know better.

jedahan 14y ago
I like to think they are trying to preserve the spirit of being able to right click->view source and learn a thing or two. Geocities + view source did spark early interest for myself in coding. Maybe sourcemaps will help with that in the future.
- joonix 14y ago
  Geocities view-sourcing. Thanks for taking me back.
- robmcm 14y ago
  Perhaps adding a commented link in a minified file to a full version? Wouldn't be hard to automate.
  - ChrisLTD 14y ago
    I've added that to a site I'm about to launch. Seems like a good compromise.
- networked 14y ago
  Source maps in JavaScript are a cool idea. More people should know about them [1][2]. [1] See, e.g., http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/developertools/sourcemaps/ http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/developertools/source... [2] ...or http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tools-and-tips/source-maps-101/ http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tools-and-tips/source-maps....
walshemj 14y ago
its old school publishers who often have very little idea what they are doing and have sclerotic development processes 9 week sprints! in one case. One site I worked on did not manage to sort out a redirect of its .net version of its domain and its over 2 Years since a flagged this as a high priority problem.
- lchang 14y ago
  Yes, but the New York Times employs top-notch webdevs. See http://open.blogs.nytimes.com/ http://open.blogs.nytimes.com/ and http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/ http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/ So they have the skills, but maybe it's for other reasons they don't follow those practices.
  - pinwale 14y ago
    The New York Times built the current site in 2006. The Times just announced that they have are working on a new site design (and presumably completely new architecture) for the last year and should release it soon. source: http://www.nytimes.com/marketing/prototype/ http://www.nytimes.com/marketing/prototype/
  - walshemj 14y ago
    There is a world of difference between doing a cute vanity project that works for say 99% of the time but doesn't mean that they buckle down and do the hard work involved delivering a major publishers site. Another example Google has a lot of smart people but they cant parse a robots.txt file with a BOM in it.

by STRML 14y ago

jedahan 14y ago

I like to think they are trying to preserve the spirit of being able to right click->view source and learn a thing or two. Geocities + view source did spark early interest for myself in coding. Maybe sourcemaps will help with that in the future.

joonix 14y ago
Geocities view-sourcing. Thanks for taking me back.
robmcm 14y ago
Perhaps adding a commented link in a minified file to a full version? Wouldn't be hard to automate.
- ChrisLTD 14y ago
  I've added that to a site I'm about to launch. Seems like a good compromise.
networked 14y ago
Source maps in JavaScript are a cool idea. More people should know about them [1][2]. [1] See, e.g., http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/developertools/sourcemaps/ http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/developertools/source... [2] ...or http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tools-and-tips/source-maps-101/ http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tools-and-tips/source-maps....

walshemj 14y ago

its old school publishers who often have very little idea what they are doing and have sclerotic development processes 9 week sprints! in one case. One site I worked on did not manage to sort out a redirect of its .net version of its domain and its over 2 Years since a flagged this as a high priority problem.

lchang 14y ago
Yes, but the New York Times employs top-notch webdevs. See http://open.blogs.nytimes.com/ http://open.blogs.nytimes.com/ and http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/ http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/ So they have the skills, but maybe it's for other reasons they don't follow those practices.
- pinwale 14y ago
  The New York Times built the current site in 2006. The Times just announced that they have are working on a new site design (and presumably completely new architecture) for the last year and should release it soon. source: http://www.nytimes.com/marketing/prototype/ http://www.nytimes.com/marketing/prototype/
- walshemj 14y ago
  There is a world of difference between doing a cute vanity project that works for say 99% of the time but doesn't mean that they buckle down and do the hard work involved delivering a major publishers site. Another example Google has a lot of smart people but they cant parse a robots.txt file with a BOM in it.