Does that limit still apply with HTTP 2 and HTTP 3?
Yes, but multiplexing does minimize the problem. You could multiplex batched requests for hundreds of resources with my strategy.
Readit NewsHow would you outcompete major CDNs/existing caching schemes already being paid for?
They don't reduce request count. For example, Chrome only allows 6 concurrent connections (requests).
If you load 10 images in 1 request, you've reduced network latency and avoided the connection limit.
As a viewer? As a publisher?
As a publisher. One who seeks to decrease load times on pages that require many resources.
shanebellone commented on Ask HN: Retrieving multiple images with a single request? · Posted by u/shanebellone
You could do that with blobs and client code...or use mjpeg movies...im not aware of multiple images as such though...itd be worth researching multipart mime types i think
I already have a working prototype that batches media requests. In my example case, I'm sending 1 request and receiving 6 images in return.
shanebellone commented on Ask HN: Retrieving multiple images with a single request? · Posted by u/shanebellone
CSS Image Sprites
https://www.w3schools.com/Css/css_image_sprites.asp
I'm familiar with css sprites too. That's still just 1 image per request though.
Say you wanted to populate a social media feed... you'd need to dynamically call media. That produces a huge amount of requests.
What if you want to batch 10 images per request? Does anyone currently do that?
shanebellone commented on Ask HN: Why don't we stream websites like movies? · Posted by u/shanebellone
> Why such archaic examples?
I haven't understood why apps are not what you ask, so I tried to remember some well-known technologies/approaches.
> Does the idea of circumventing a refresh offend you?
Yes because I prefer to request things from online when I want but not when my device wants.
"I haven't understood why apps are not what you ask, so I tried to remember some well-known technologies/approaches."
I'm talking about websites that function like apps but have the privacy/security benefits of being sandboxed inside the browser (accessed by URL or link).
It seems we may be talking about different things. I am not advocating for downloadable apps (I've never liked the app store paradigm nor the access it grants random developers). I'm advocating for more capable websites (which IMO "ought" to protect user data--not leverage it).
The concept of a "mom test" is condescending as well. Many moms code.