3 ms·
Not mentioning prefetch in the title is extremely clickbaity IMO. You could also argue that prefetching IS visiting a site (the data was still downloaded, it c
by ranger_danger 2y ago
Not mentioning prefetch in the title is extremely clickbaity IMO.
You could also argue that prefetching IS visiting a site (the data was still downloaded, it counts as a visit on their end for sure), you just haven't actually viewed the content yet.
- onion2k 2y agoIsn't the point that Google caches the site, and the visitor loads the caches SXG data from Google, and they never hit the server of the site itself. It's like AMP on steroids. It definitely doesn't count as a visit for the site in question. https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/signed-exchange https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/signed-...
- ranger_danger 2y agoI wouldn't know because it was not explained at all, in the title or in the link (at least for me, I'm on firefox so it doesn't load much, or give any explanation). But if it's true that google is caching the page themselves, then yes you're right and I did not even consider that. Thanks
- rapawel 2y agoYes, exactly - well put. The key difference from AMP is that the site signs the content and it’s attributed to their origin, not Google’s. So, while it’s served from Google’s cache, it still counts as the publisher’s page in terms of origin and trust.
- rapawel 2y agoThanks, fair point. I skipped technical terms like “prefetch” or “SXG” in the title to make it more approachable and spark curiosity — but I get how that could feel misleading. You're right that prefetching counts as a visit in some sense. The point of the demo was to highlight how unexpected it can feel to load a site while offline, even if you never actively opened it before.