W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > site-comments@w3.org > August 2009

compression of HTML would save a lot of money

From: FinanzNachrichten.de, Markus Meister <markus.meister@finanznachrichten.de>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:28:59 +0200
To: <site-comments@w3.org>, <w3c-ac-forum@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01df01ca14ee$616d5e90$24481bb0$@meister@finanznachrichten.de>
Dear Ian,

I have just noticed that we don't use HTML compression on our W3C website.
If we would use e.g. GZIP, we could save a lot of traffic and money.

3 examples:

http://www.w3.org/       46 kB
http://lists.w3.org/    227 kB
http://validator.w3.org/ 27 kB

I have just put these three html files on our test server and the result
confirmed that if we would deliver compressed files, the size would somewhat
smaller and we could reduce our costs by saving cash:

* homepage compressed:          14 kB (-70 % traffic)
* lists homepage compressed:    23 kB (-90 % traffic)
* validator homepage compressed: 5 kB (-81 % traffic)


Looking at our financial situation, it would be phantastic if you could
reduce our traffic expenses by maybe -50 % (graphics would not be concerned
by a compression).

If there are no 'political' reasons why it's not possible for us to use
compression, please check this idea with the server responsible.
When the traffic numbers are still around the same as last year (when I
proposed advertising to increase our revenues) I would guess that we could
save as much traffic costs that we economize a 5 digit Euro/USD amount per
year with compression.

Best regards,

FINANZNACHRICHTEN.DE
Markus Meister

-------------------------------------------
http://www.finanznachrichten.de
Alle News zu Aktien, Börse und Finanzen!!
-------------------------------------------
DER SPEKULANT - Der Börsenbrief für clevere Anleger 
http://www.derspekulant.ch
-------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 10:29:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:21:31 GMT