4 ms·
Agree, but technically if the spec is well-defined browsers can recognize that JS URL as a magic string instead of actually loading that JS, sorta like how brow
by geofft 7y ago
Agree, but technically if the spec is well-defined browsers can recognize that JS URL as a magic string instead of actually loading that JS, sorta like how browsers don't actually go to w3c.org when they see an HTML 4.01 doctype.
Perhaps the right place is to lobby the WHATWG for an explicit exception in the definition of the script tag to handle these ampproject.org URLs in an API-compatible way.
- tyingq 7y agoIf you don't load the js, the amp specific tags don't work. So, for example, no images.
- geofft 7y agoI mean that browsers should implement support for the AMP-specific tags directly, without needing to load the JS to do so. If the AMP spec is complete, then this should theoretically be possible.
- lern_too_spel 7y agoThat appears to be how it works. Here's an AMP page served from Bing's cache. No resources are loaded from Google. view-source:https://www.bing.com/amp/s/amp.azcentral.com/amp/1912438001 https://www.bing.com/amp/s/amp.azcentral.com/amp/1912438001