4 ms·

Through clicking the "web" link it's exciting to see Google AMP (Accelerated Mobile Pages) [0] has support for this article. The WSJ paywall does not seem to a

Through clicking the "web" link it's exciting to see Google AMP (Accelerated Mobile Pages) [0] has support for this article. The WSJ paywall does not seem to affect it. The load time for me on average wifi was almost unnoticeable. [0]: https://www.ampproject.org/ https://www.ampproject.org/

__derek__ 10y ago
AMP versions of articles are developed by publishers, not by Google, so it's there thanks to WSJ. As for the paywall, the AMP access component[1] is not stable, so WSJ's options were basically to skip AMP (and the associated traffic) or to skip the paywall. [1]: https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/extensions/amp-access/amp-access.md https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/extensions...
- kuschku 10y ago
  AMP Access is funny anyway, as it just sets a display: none on the content. There're already extensions circumventing it.
- nostromo 10y ago
  I see the paywall on WSJ's AMP: http://imgur.com/tg7PqBu http://imgur.com/tg7PqBu Got this from this page: https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/facebook-posts-strong-profit-and-revenue-growth-1469650289 https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/facebook... (You can't view it from desktop as they're doing browser detection and forward you to the WSJ page.)
  - __derek__ 10y ago
    Oh, good catch. I'm incorrect, and they are using the component.[1] I suppose they just have the same policy for the carousel as for Google News. [1]: http://i.imgur.com/Jlu6JRX.png http://i.imgur.com/Jlu6JRX.png
dingo_bat 10y ago
I hate AMP so much. It hijacks the scrolling mechanism and makes it impossible to share the link.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- tedmiston 10y ago
  That sounds like a bug they should definitely fix. I just tried the normal tap at the top of the screen to scroll to the beginning of a page, and it indeed breaks on AMP pages.

__derek__ 10y ago

AMP versions of articles are developed by publishers, not by Google, so it's there thanks to WSJ. As for the paywall, the AMP access component[1] is not stable, so WSJ's options were basically to skip AMP (and the associated traffic) or to skip the paywall. [1]: https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/extensions/amp-access/amp-access.md https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/extensions...

kuschku 10y ago
AMP Access is funny anyway, as it just sets a display: none on the content. There're already extensions circumventing it.
nostromo 10y ago
I see the paywall on WSJ's AMP: http://imgur.com/tg7PqBu http://imgur.com/tg7PqBu Got this from this page: https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/facebook-posts-strong-profit-and-revenue-growth-1469650289 https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/facebook... (You can't view it from desktop as they're doing browser detection and forward you to the WSJ page.)
- __derek__ 10y ago
  Oh, good catch. I'm incorrect, and they are using the component.[1] I suppose they just have the same policy for the carousel as for Google News. [1]: http://i.imgur.com/Jlu6JRX.png http://i.imgur.com/Jlu6JRX.png

dingo_bat 10y ago

I hate AMP so much. It hijacks the scrolling mechanism and makes it impossible to share the link.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
tedmiston 10y ago
That sounds like a bug they should definitely fix. I just tried the normal tap at the top of the screen to scroll to the beginning of a page, and it indeed breaks on AMP pages.