4 ms·

I absolutely support this move, I've been trying to rid myself of AMP since it was released and this at least stops me from having to clean up URLs when sharing

I absolutely support this move, I've been trying to rid myself of AMP since it was released and this at least stops me from having to clean up URLs when sharing them.

ucaetano 9y ago
"TL of AMP here. Just wanted to clarify that we specifically requested Apple (and other browser vendors) to do this. AMP's policy states that platforms should share the canonical URL of an article whenever technically possible." Apple is just following AMP's request.
- MBCook 9y ago
  Why are you posting the exact same comment as a response to so many others?
  - ucaetano 9y ago
    Well, informing people? I actually do this in a lot of threads. Is that bad?
    - MBCook 9y ago
      I don't know, it doesn't seem useful to me. Especially since the thing you're quoting is currently the #1 comment.
      - ucaetano 9y ago
        Valid point. I deleted some of them in less relevant threads.
    - epistasis 9y ago
      It seems fairly irrelevant, and not so informative. How does your quotation relate to the original commenters statement?
      - ucaetano 9y ago
        > How does your quotation relate to the original commenters statement? That this wasn't "Apple standing up to AMP" as the commenters claimed.
        epistasis 9y ago
        The commenter you were replying to did not say anything about "Apple standing up to AMP."
- admiralpumpkin 9y ago
  This is a strange (repeated) response. Google set up a web detour without users' consent, and has a flagger waving upset people back to canonical links. Apple _is_ routing people back to the main road, not because of Google's suggesting it, but because it's the only reasonable thing to do. The implication of your comment is that if Google has asked Apple to pass on the AMP links that they would do so, which I highly doubt. A far more appropriate summary is: Apple is acting to correct Google's interference with web links; irrespective of Google's desires.

4 ms·

I absolutely support this move, I've been trying to rid myself of AMP since it was released and this at least stops me from having to clean up URLs when sharing

by mrmondo 9y ago

I absolutely support this move, I've been trying to rid myself of AMP since it was released and this at least stops me from having to clean up URLs when sharing them.

ucaetano 9y ago
"TL of AMP here. Just wanted to clarify that we specifically requested Apple (and other browser vendors) to do this. AMP's policy states that platforms should share the canonical URL of an article whenever technically possible." Apple is just following AMP's request.
- MBCook 9y ago
  Why are you posting the exact same comment as a response to so many others?
  - ucaetano 9y ago
    Well, informing people? I actually do this in a lot of threads. Is that bad?
    - MBCook 9y ago
      I don't know, it doesn't seem useful to me. Especially since the thing you're quoting is currently the #1 comment.
      - ucaetano 9y ago
        Valid point. I deleted some of them in less relevant threads.
    - epistasis 9y ago
      It seems fairly irrelevant, and not so informative. How does your quotation relate to the original commenters statement?
      - ucaetano 9y ago
        > How does your quotation relate to the original commenters statement? That this wasn't "Apple standing up to AMP" as the commenters claimed.
        epistasis 9y ago
        The commenter you were replying to did not say anything about "Apple standing up to AMP."
- admiralpumpkin 9y ago
  This is a strange (repeated) response. Google set up a web detour without users' consent, and has a flagger waving upset people back to canonical links. Apple _is_ routing people back to the main road, not because of Google's suggesting it, but because it's the only reasonable thing to do. The implication of your comment is that if Google has asked Apple to pass on the AMP links that they would do so, which I highly doubt. A far more appropriate summary is: Apple is acting to correct Google's interference with web links; irrespective of Google's desires.