No, I don’t understand why you brought it up. It was Google trying to shove through something they’d invented, using their market power as leverage. You don’t

No, I don’t understand why you brought it up. It was Google trying to shove through something they’d invented, using their market power as leverage. You don’t make good standards like that. It was also not at all about standardising HTML email—it didn’t improve anything in that way, except insofar as the AMP part being chosen implies that the client has decent HTML support. AMP for Email is purely about dynamic content in emails. And the very way that each provider that supports AMP for Email has required whitelisting of each sender shows there’s something extremely rotten about the entire thing.