5 ms·

I did a technical review of what I felt were the major pros/cons of implementing AMP pages: http://blog.robertelder.org/adding-support-for-amp-pages/ http://bl

I did a technical review of what I felt were the major pros/cons of implementing AMP pages: http://blog.robertelder.org/adding-support-for-amp-pages/ http://blog.robertelder.org/adding-support-for-amp-pages/ Edit: To save you a click, here are some of the key points: - You can't use Javascript on AMP pages, but you can put Javascript in iframes or substitute the javascript feature for an existing amp-component. - AMP pages require that Javascript is enabled. - In order for pages to pass AMP validation you must include the "https://cdn.ampproject.org/v0.js" https://cdn.ampproject.org/v0.js" script on AMP pages. Furthermore, I believe you are required to hotlink to the ampproject version as I have been unable to pass validation with a locally served copy of these scripts. - You can't use inline 'style="..."' tags - AMP uses inline 'style="..."' tags on rendered markup - External stylesheets are not allowed - You will likely want to maintain a separate AMP view and a non-amp version of your pages. - The DOM structure of AMP pages will be slightly different than for desktop pages. I wouldn't say that I like AMP, but since the world is going mobile I figured I should try to become and early adopter for AMP. In a way, I kind of hope that the AMP projects gets abandoned, but if that happens then I'll have wasted a bunch of time adopting it.

TeMPOraL 10y ago
Thanks for writing the review, it's a summary. BTW. Without judging whether AMP is good or bad, I'll say in this comment you just highlighted the mechanism by which many a bad thing becomes commonplace. "I wish $thing wouldn't be done, but because $market_realities, I figure I should adopt the $thing for now". Even if nobody wants $thing to happen, when many people think like this, it'll get adopted anyway, and then enshrined as the new status quo.
- dmoy 10y ago
  I get it though. Because while I dislike many things about AMP (mentioned elsewhere in the comments here), my non technical friends and family don't seem to rely on the functionality that's getting hosed. They don't actually ever look at the URL bar for example (incidentally may explain their propensity to fall for phishing attacks).
jayd16 10y ago
The AMP only js, hot linking and non-local copy is part of the cache magic that makes it work so I wouldn't expect that to change.
madeofpalk 10y ago
Have you looked at and 'reviewed' alternatives, such as Facebook Instant Articles or Apple News Format? Why is passing validation an important thing for AMP? The main complaint I hear about it is the AMP CDN, where Google caches and hosts your page for you. If you're failing validation then they wouldn't do this, right? So you get the advantages of a fast page without the disadvantage of Google reposting your content.
- lucideer 10y ago
  The main advantage of validation is prioritisation in Google's search results, the AMP logo next to your search result on Google (which for most Google users has come to mean "fast"), and the extra speed-up of Google's CDN.
  - madeofpalk 10y ago
    Herein lies the 'confusion' with AMP - its actually two completely different things: - news distribution platform - framework and guidelines for making fast webpages If you want Google to distribute and prioritise your content, you'll have to play by their rules, just in the same way if you want Apple's help as well.
- quelltext 10y ago
  I have implemented both AMP and Instant Article "views" for a website and boy is the latter a bigger pain in the ass. The format is way more restrictive than AMP. Whereas the latter allows for nested lists, columns, or nested pictures Instant Articles require almost everything to be linearly placed on the top level. So unless your source format has a similarly simple structure you will have to think about ways to transform it down to that. Then, documentation is missing all the crucial details, so I ended up sifting through FB's SDK internals, which still ended up not covering all the issues reported by the web editor. Also, the only way to visually test the output is via the Page Manager app.
flukus 10y ago
So have we gone full circle on turned html into a basic document structure? I thought the next cycle would have been in json.

TeMPOraL 10y ago

Thanks for writing the review, it's a summary. BTW. Without judging whether AMP is good or bad, I'll say in this comment you just highlighted the mechanism by which many a bad thing becomes commonplace. "I wish $thing wouldn't be done, but because $market_realities, I figure I should adopt the $thing for now". Even if nobody wants $thing to happen, when many people think like this, it'll get adopted anyway, and then enshrined as the new status quo.

dmoy 10y ago
I get it though. Because while I dislike many things about AMP (mentioned elsewhere in the comments here), my non technical friends and family don't seem to rely on the functionality that's getting hosed. They don't actually ever look at the URL bar for example (incidentally may explain their propensity to fall for phishing attacks).

jayd16 10y ago

The AMP only js, hot linking and non-local copy is part of the cache magic that makes it work so I wouldn't expect that to change.

madeofpalk 10y ago

Have you looked at and 'reviewed' alternatives, such as Facebook Instant Articles or Apple News Format? Why is passing validation an important thing for AMP? The main complaint I hear about it is the AMP CDN, where Google caches and hosts your page for you. If you're failing validation then they wouldn't do this, right? So you get the advantages of a fast page without the disadvantage of Google reposting your content.

lucideer 10y ago
The main advantage of validation is prioritisation in Google's search results, the AMP logo next to your search result on Google (which for most Google users has come to mean "fast"), and the extra speed-up of Google's CDN.
- madeofpalk 10y ago
  Herein lies the 'confusion' with AMP - its actually two completely different things: - news distribution platform - framework and guidelines for making fast webpages If you want Google to distribute and prioritise your content, you'll have to play by their rules, just in the same way if you want Apple's help as well.
quelltext 10y ago
I have implemented both AMP and Instant Article "views" for a website and boy is the latter a bigger pain in the ass. The format is way more restrictive than AMP. Whereas the latter allows for nested lists, columns, or nested pictures Instant Articles require almost everything to be linearly placed on the top level. So unless your source format has a similarly simple structure you will have to think about ways to transform it down to that. Then, documentation is missing all the crucial details, so I ended up sifting through FB's SDK internals, which still ended up not covering all the issues reported by the web editor. Also, the only way to visually test the output is via the Page Manager app.

flukus 10y ago

So have we gone full circle on turned html into a basic document structure? I thought the next cycle would have been in json.