Adlago

Q - Do you want to take our latest release for a test drive? A - Of course

Same to me - FF and Chrome desktop (ununtu 16.04)

Add in your globalTemplate before </head> <link rel="preload" href="https://your site/applications/core/interface/font/icomoon.woff?v=-29n77j" as="font" type="font/woff" crossorigin="anonymous"> <link rel="preload" href="https://your site/applications/core/interface/font/fontawesome-webfont.woff2?v=4.7.0" as="font" type="font/woff2" crossorigin="anonymous">

For a normal users - you are right. Cache works correctly. But when a speed test is done by a machine - incl. and these Google machines, these machines do not use cache. The http/2 protocol speeds up CSS and JS, but font awesome slow down a browser. Here are three concurrent tests from different test server- all reflect this delay.

This test I do on this site as a guest - as every online tool does a test. Such an estimate speed makes and Google when analyzing the sites in which it publishes advertisements. This reduces the price paid by site owners. Of course, users who logged into a site do not have this issue. But when it comes to money - any delay in loading site is bad. And I see many sites that rely on this ...

I agree that using data: image must also be refined and very carefully used. And here we have a reasonable compromise. But I think there should be quicker decisions - I'm also looking for them.

Pay attention - how late is the loading font awesome well after basic resources have been loaded - and the browser waits - that slows site rendering. More curious is that this delay reduces the value of ads, of course for anyone who expects money from Google. I'm not worried about myself - I do not use ads. But I think the font awesome is a poor place in the suite. The same delay, unfortunately, is also observed in 4.4 alpha.

yes, but the added weight is incomparably less. Font awesome causes a download of 65kB file and this slows rendering.

Thanks, we sent her to come quickly everywhere Cheers!

from Bulgaria! be healthy and successful. Do bugs to make life interesting. Cheers!

Merry Christmas !!! Let yourself be healthy, happy and even more successful in everything you create. Cheers !!!

X-XSS-Protection when there is a value of 0 disables XSS filtering. This is not dangerous if a directive Content-Security-Policyis activated. But if you see security headers test your site - it does not have such an active directive. And probably many clients too. https://securityheaders.com/?q=https%3A%2F%2Finvisioncommunity.com%2Fforums%2F&amp;followRedirects=on

This is a security directive that is included in a htaccess file for apache server or in a nginx server configuration. We recommend a value of: 1; mode= block In the IPS suite you use a value of 0 in the Output php file in the System/Output and this creates a duplication of the X-XSS-Protection directive in a response headers. Please remove this from the Output php file for the next release. /** * @brief Additional HTTP Headers */ public $httpHeaders = array( 'X-XSS-Protection' => '0', // This is so when we post contents with scripts (which is possible in the editor, like when embedding a Twitter tweet) the broswer doesn't block it );

Font awesome is not the best solution. Why - because it provides a delay in loading site ... And the more new things create the more you will be delayed loading site. I personally got tired of watching empty squares at the loading site. Perhaps it is good to look for other solutions. For example - the three icons that load in mobile version navigation, I replaced with data images. Loading instantly ...