IMHO, this is a bad idea, XSS is nasty shit and if this gets widespread adoption, it will be tougher to detect XSS attempts on the browser-side.

Our RECOMMENDATION still is: serve concatenated, gzipped JavaScript files with proper headers yourself, or, IN CASE YOU CAN’T, use the google-served files above.

@Marten: Many sites serve images and scripts from different domains. If you use extensions that break the internet, it’s really not anyone’s problem, but your own.

@masterleep: no, this should work for everything. one limitation is that it currently doesn’t work for SSL sites (i hear that support for that is coming).

"Minification is the practice of removing unnecessary characters from code to reduce its size thereby improving load times. When code is minified all comments are removed, as well as unneeded white space characters (space, newline, and tab). In the case of JavaScript, this improves response time performance because the size of the downloaded file is reduced."

This is what I was talking about and I am not sure how this affects the browser with minification? That was all I was asking was if you were going to minimize the .js files. Minifying does not cause the browser to do ANY extra work.

So your quote "again the scripts are served gzipped, which compresses about 1:5. why do you want it packed? this only makes it MUCH slower, as the browser has to use slowish JavaScript to unpack, and it makes finding bugs really hard." is not relevant to my question. My question was are going to have minified files to have downloaded. Many other frameworks: YUI, jQuery, and MooTools offer up a minimized version of the files. I understand where it might be more difficult to troubleshoot, but it is not uncommon. Even with the Google Served Libraries, mootools and jquery have minimized versions. Google names them uncompressed, but they are minimized versions.

I did not ask for a compact version, I asked about a minified version.