4 ms·
> In 2018, my recommendation was to avoid AMP, to use AMP for the most relevant pages, or to use AMP only. What an excellent, mediocre, and/or bad recommendati
by bjt2n3904 6y ago
> In 2018, my recommendation was to avoid AMP, to use AMP for the most relevant pages, or to use AMP only.
What an excellent, mediocre, and/or bad recommendation!
- corytheboyd 6y agoI’d rate them excellent, nightmare hellscape, and bad. The amount of work required to efficiently deliver a second version of your content sounds like such a horrible terrible idea. HN mindset about Google aside, something strictly AMP would likely be a easier to replace than the mess that tries to do both.
- tyingq 6y agoHeh, yes. Recommended you use none, some, or all. That's, uh, all possibilities.
- pvorb 6y agoIt's not the same as all possibilities. It's just arguing that you should avoid having an AMP and a regular version of every piece of content on your site. You should either go all in or avoid it entirely. And if you must provide an AMP version along with the regular one, only do it for the most important pages. The sentence is formulated really unfortunate, though. I also wouldn't approve it.
- edoceo 6y agoIt's the lawyer answer: "it depends...". Some of this "advice" takes a long time to say nothing.