why is it fetched with each request? shouldn't it be cached in your browser? the ones i am using (ie5 mac/windows) do it because i experienced a problem the other way around (old javascript in the cache and new was not loading). what about your browser settings?

I'm using the default settings on both browsers. On Mozilla, that is

Compare the page in the cache to the page on the network ( ) Every time I view the page (X) When the page is out of date ( ) Once per session ( ) Never

on IE6.0/Win:

Neuere Versionen der gespeicherten Seiten suchen: ( ) Bei jedem Zugriff ( ) Bei jedem Start von Internet Explorer (X) Automatisch ( ) Nie

well, i won't hesitate to step back to the former handling if this is not really working.

it's a pity because including all the same javascript and css code on all the pages is really extremely redundant and has its performance nuisances, too.

do you think there will be a way to do this right, one day? and what will it look like then?

is to render and serve them as static files. That could go hand in hand with fixing the static web directory structure of antville. Currently, we have a directory for images and one for uploaded files, and in each of these we have subdirectories for the single weblogs/sites:

/static/images/[weblogname] /static/files/[weblogname]

This makes it more complicated than it should be to zip/tar the files belonging to one weblog, and it doesn't give us one place to put static files for weblogs that are not uploaded images/files. What this should look like IMO is this:

/static/[weblogname]/images /static/[weblogname]/files

Then we could render the stylesheet and javascript files to /static/[weblogname] directory and everything belonging to one weblog would be neatly bundled in one place...

Of course it would also increase the number of things to take care of when updating antville.org...

PS: I'm right now checking my claim that serving the files from a static location would prevent repeated GETs.

and in the /static/[weblogname] directory we then could deposit file-based skins, too, couldn't we?

can the antville paths easily be modified this way or are there any bumpers?

and serving stylesheet/javascript as static files does help. Both browsers stop requesting the files for some time (IE for longer, Mozilla for a shorter period), and when they ask again, they get a 304 not-modified response without the actual files.

Regarding the change that would be required in Antville for changing the static file organization: we'd have to rewrite the code that generates the paths for image/file saving and serving. Robert probably knows best how much work that would be. I think the biggest work would be to update the static files of existing installations.

We could also put file based skin in that directory, but skins don't need to be accessible via HTTP, so unless we put them there for download that wouldn't make much sense.

We could also put file based skin in that directory, but skins don't need to be accessible via HTTP, so unless we put them there for download that wouldn't make much sense.

but wouldn't up- & downlaodable skins be the solution for the idea of easy template-switching?

won't downloading one's skins be an important step towards exporting a site? and what about "that everything is in one place"? oops, chronistin, that was almost simultaneously...

having file-based skins somewhere where Helma can use them and putting (zipped) files where they can be downloaded are two different things. But it would be a nice things to have static HTTP-directories other than image and files.