News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google HTML/CSS Style Guide – Omit Optional Tags by DougWebb on Saturday September 17, 2016 @12:33PM (#12521166)
If your output is compressed (which it should be if you're worried about response size) then omitting end tags has much less impact, I believe. All of the tags should get compressed well because they're repeated so often, and they should be much smaller overall than your non-repetitive content.
Re:Google HTML/CSS Style Guide – Omit Optional Tags by TheRealPomax on Saturday September 17, 2016 @01:25PM (#12521410)
But note that on the scale of move as much data around as Google does, or even "the web as a whole", shaving even a few bytes off of every single gzip packet stream can still equate to significant network relief.
Re:Google HTML/CSS Style Guide – Omit Optional Tags by DougWebb on Saturday September 17, 2016 @01:56PM (#12521565)
I suspect their advice is for their benefit, not other website devs. They can save a lot of space in their archive if everyone's pages were smaller. Nothing compared to better image compression though.
Re:Google HTML/CSS Style Guide – Omit Optional Tags by dgacmu on Saturday September 17, 2016 @02:43PM (#12521789)
No - a few bytes on a web page are insignificant compared to the data volume of images and movies. This is all about getting pages to load faster on mobile.
Re:Google HTML/CSS Style Guide – Omit Optional Tags by nevir on Tuesday September 20, 2016 @05:44PM (#12543679)
If those extra bytes drop you from two packets to one, that's a _significant_ reduction in traffic

(which, IIRC, was the original rationale behind that style guide rule)