Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 31 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Removed 859 of 1213 bytes from logo #6
Inspired by your project I thought I might make a contribution, for the first time ever on Github.
I have reworked the logo to shave 859 bytes, this is with no loss of image fidelity. I believe a further 50 or so bytes can be saved by using integers rather than floating point numbers with marginal loss of quality. I don't think people would notice. However, since this is my first ever pull request I thought that getting the file down to 354 bytes would be a good start.
To go even lower I would recommend placing the SVG in the stylesheet and using a pseudo element to show the logo. This means that on subsequent page loads the logo is already there in the CSS and does will not need to be part of each and every document.
@mshaw42 This. Is. Amazing. Thank you so much. You have totally blown my mind with this.
I had already been looking into the merits of loading it in a way in which it can be cached, rather than included in the body of the page.
In a very pedantic manner, I have noticed a very slight discrepancy between your rewrite of the logo, and the original one. The difference is so minor that I'm still totally happy merging this, but I do just want to record it here for posterity. To me at least, the manual rewrite appears to have a slightly lighter stroke.
The manual rewrite:
So, many months later I find my email from you! Agreed your original is better, after all it is the original. Glad you appreciated the version with rounding errors, I know some people who call themselves 'graphic designers' that would take umbrage! NASA only ever work to nine decimal places and that is accurate enough to land on Pluto. SVGs are not rocket science so integers are okay for a thumbnail image on a hand sized screen viewed at arm's length. Have you heard of Galileo? Maybe in falsetto in a Queen song? That's the guy... The other day I posted some comment about the chap on HN and a fellow HNer chimed in with some details I did not know. Anyway, Galileo's problem was not the Catholic church. His problem was that he failed to convince his peers. Unbeknownst to him at the time was how his telescope magnified the relative size of the stars. Furthermore, since his telescope only got him as far as Saturn, the notion that the nearest star could be 2000000000000 furlongs away was unimaginable to anyone but god at the time. Then there was the limitations of his telescope, it was not possible to detect solar parallax, i. e. the angle subtended at a star by the mean radius of the Earth's orbit around the Sun. Tycho Brahe was not impressed, so he didn't really get the heliocentric concept that Galileo was barking on about. Had Galileo been able to convince his peers that he was onto something then he probably might have been spared those little trifles he had with the Inquisition. We would have also inherited a different story and not cast our ancestors as some Dark Ages Luddites. Science was good back then but it doesn't suit the narrative we tell ourselves. At the moment those of us that are interested in greening the web are not exactly setting the world alight. We have not convinced our peers that this is something that needs to be done. I am struggling to make headwind with my potential clients that going green is what they need to do. Maybe you are having the same problems too. We operate in a world of Tycho Brahe's and Catholic churches that want to over complicate this simple task of creating maintainable, lean, simple web pages. They are wanting to build more and more complex build tools with pages created by scripts, frameworks and hacks. They are not getting the heliocentricity idea. So, learning from Galileo, I suggest we need to up our game and convince our peers or a new generation of web developers that lean and green is the way to do it. It is not about sustainability, sustainability sounds too much like being on life support and not thriving. We need to go thriving, with metrics in terms of page views and conversion rates. Real projects are needed. Real success stories are needed. I think we also need to hit the conference circuit. You are in a great place with those Wordpress people to hit the stage and present the presentation. I think this needs to be aimed for. We need to put green web design on the map. To make it a thing. I think you could be the next Ethan whatever-his-name-was, do for green web design what Ethan did for Responsive Web Design. Or maybe we get Heydon Pickering to be the poster child for this currently lost cause. There are lots of strands such as Heydon's accessibility passion to bring into this, Lea Verou's ideas on SVG, Rachel Andrew's framework free CSS grid and plenty others. With these ingredients I think we could put together something compelling, compelling enough to convince Google that Lighthouse needs to measure website greenyness. Heck, if people can have conferences on selling SEO snake oil, why can't we have a whole conference about making the web green? Imagine, sponsored by Adobe, people paying good money and wanting to join the new religion. As the saying goes, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, organised citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” So are you up for stepping up and bringing on a little revolution in website design? One that is not even thought of yet? A revolution whose time has yet to come? We are already ahead of the curve on this and have done the thinking that others, presumably bogged down by their build tools and agile development methodologies have not the time of day for? What is there to lose, apart from a couple of power plants? Let me know if that you have the stomach for this type of a journey, with some embryonic conference presentations some time soon...…
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 at 23:05, Jack Lenox ***@***.***> wrote: @mshaw42 <https://github.com/mshaw42> This. Is. Amazing. Thank you so much. You have totally blown my mind with this. I had already been looking into the merits of loading it in a way in which it can be cached, rather than included in the body of the page. In a very pedantic manner, I have noticed a very slight discrepancy between your rewrite of the logo, and the original one. The difference is so minor that I'm still totally happy merging this, but I didn't just want to record it here for posterity. To me at least, the manual rewrite appears to have a slightly lighter stroke. The original: [image: screenshot_2018-07-18 susty wp just another wordpress site] <https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/751476/42847968-10953b1e-8a1e-11e8-9c37-6eba1a0227dc.png> The manual rewrite: [image: screenshot_2018-07-18 susty wp just another wordpress site 1] <https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/751476/42847998-2289dae6-8a1e-11e8-9c61-8cebc1d90850.png> — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#6 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGEr_76DK8YXuItlJvz80Xw06EuSby6Jks5uHl-6gaJpZM4VNNqa> .