On 2005-02-24, Slava Bizyayev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Mark, > > Regarding the implementation of Apache::Clean, the question is -- > whether or not you can benefit one way or another from the fact that > your uncompressed responses are 5-20% less? I can really talk about the > Light-Compression in Apache::Dynagzip, keeping in mind that > Apache::Clean provides many extra things, but I assume that the blank > spaces make the main "blank volume" of unprepared for transmission > files. > > Normal compression (gzip) usually makes files 3-20 times less. The > compression ratio depends very little on whether the light compression > was applied prior to gzip, or not. >
Thanks Slava. I hadn't read closely about Dynagzip before. Now I see that I see it does white space compression, I think I may stop there, and not try to add Apache::Clean to the mix as well. > What question would you like to add to Web Content Compression FAQ? Well, I can tell you my question, but I can't tell if you it has been frequent. :) Basically: Is it worth "cleaning" (safely modifying) HTML before it's compressed? I have a minor gripe about HTML::Clean, because it doesn't document which methods could affect the design of the page, versus which methods don't. This must start happening somewhere between level 1 and level 9, but it's not documented where. For example, removing 'blink' tags alters the design and perhaps other things do as well. But I should really be directing this to the author, and not this list. :) Mark