Note archive: August, 2019

117

sparkline
                    5th                     10th                     15th                     20th                     25th                     30th     
12am                
4am  
8am    
12pm                            
4pm                            
8pm                        

map

Saturday, August 31st, 2019

Replying to a tweet from @ianand

Disallowing is one option, but another could be to rewrite script elements to be inert during preload and activated on actual load.

Thursday, August 29th, 2019

Wednesday, August 28th, 2019

Checked in at Mrs Murphy and Sons Irish Bistro. Session — with Jessica map

Checked in at Mrs Murphy and Sons Irish Bistro. Session — with Jessica

Tuesday, August 27th, 2019

Monday, August 26th, 2019

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

Is there a timeline on when we can expect to see non-AMP pages (with web packaging) getting the same preferential treatment as AMP pages in search?

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

Oh, yes, I wasn’t suggesting that any pages are ready to be hosted and pre-rendered as they are today—there would certainly need to be some rejiggng done, either by the author or the host.

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

Yes, I linked to that in my post.

But this wouldn’t be “arbitrary” content—there would be strict criteria for admission.

It feels like there’s a big spectrum between “arbitrary” and “only AMP”.

Sunday, August 25th, 2019

Checked in at Chicago Brewhouse. Chicago dog! — with Jessica map

Checked in at Chicago Brewhouse. Chicago dog! — with Jessica

Saturday, August 24th, 2019

I’m dubious of this proposal. I just don’t think a nice bag can offer the kind of companionship you get from an animal.

I’m dubious of this proposal. I just don’t think a nice bag can offer the kind of companionship you get from an animal.

Reading Skyfaring by Mark Vanhoenacker.

Replying to a tweet from @tobie

If only Google Search had a similar model.

As it stands, the AMP team gets to offload the unfairness of the format’s privileged position onto the search team, while maintaining the appearance of open source and good governance for AMP.

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

You won’t recommend me for a Product Manager job at Google?

My dreams lie in tatters before me.

How about a position on the AMP advisory committee? I’m hoping fascists like me aren’t barred.

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

Never once did I claim that using AMP would result in fewer clicks for publishers.

It’s exactly because AMP is guaranteed to work this way—while nothing else will—that makes the situation unfair.

Publishers have no choice but to use AMP.

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

But only for AMP pages.

No other framework gets this treatment.

No other web pages—no matter how fast—get this treatment.

Any wonder that developers are resentful of AMP?

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

You’ll notice that I never once said that AMP is a ranking factor.

I said AMP is unfairly privileged in Google search results …because AMP is unfairly privileged in Google search results.

That’s a real shame for AMP-the-format.

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

AMP as often cited is not a ranking factor

This is the kind of semantic chicanery I’m talking about.

AMP pages are pre-rendered by Google. Regular (fast) web pages are not.

The Top Stories carousel appears above other results.

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

Publisher value enabled by AMP?

Publishers are using AMP because they have to, not because they want to.

If AMP weren’t treated differently to other frameworks, we could assess its true value.

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

To understand my position, start with the position “one framework shouldn’t be unfairly privileged in search results” and then extrapolate from there. That is the fundamental disagreement.

(I think I’ve made that pretty clear, right?)

Friday, August 23rd, 2019

Replying to a tweet from @adactio

So, just to be clear, while you might be capable of the mental gymnastics required to think “Well, leaving aside the unfairness of the SEO situation with AMP…”, I cannot do that.

I wish AMP would compete on its own merits.

Do it.

Please.

Replying to a tweet from @pbakaus

Me too! I would love to get behind AMP—a declarative framework where configuration happens in HTML rather than JavaScript: great!

But I cannot in good conscience support it while it is being unfairly prioritised and propped up in search.

Replying to a tweet from @pbakaus

It is not orthongonal as long as AMP is being privileged in search. This isn’t something you can just handwave away. The unfairness of it actively harms AMP-as-framework.

Replying to a tweet from @tobie

I have no problems with AMP, the open source format (accessibility issues notwithstanding).

I have no problems with AMP’s governance model.

I have serious problems with AMP’s privileged position in Google Search. It’s an abuse of power.

Replying to a tweet from @pbakaus

Agreed! Maintaining one site is nicer than two.

And yet publishers with already-fast sites (like The Guardian) are compelled to make AMP versions for the search benefits.

That’s not a side point—it is THE point!

Replying to a tweet from @pbakaus

…but if you use any framework other than AMP, you don’t get any of the Google Search benefits that are only bestowed on sites “choosing” to use AMP.

Hardly seems fair.

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

Yowza!

Far from questioning AMP’s right to exist, I want it to exist and compete on a level playing field—without being propped up by an unfair advantage in search results.

Classic fascism, that.

Thursday, August 22nd, 2019

Replying to a tweet from @cramforce

When I say “Google is now strongly encouraging publishers to only publish AMP”, I mean AMP pages without a corresponding regular web page.

Cue semantic chicanery about AMP being regular web pages (spoiler: they are not).

Replying to a tweet from @arctictony

I would absolutely love it if AMP were competing on a level playing field with the likes of Facebook Instant Articles and Apple News …but with Google’s SEO strong-arming tactics, the playing field is far from level.

Replying to a tweet from @arctictony

Also, neither Apple or Facebook have a monopoly in search—Google does. Google is abusing that monopoly to get publishers to publish AMP …or suffer the SEO consequences.

Replying to a tweet from @arctictony

Except that Apple never suggested that publishers should switch their main site over to the Apple News Format. Google is now strongly encouraging publishers to only publish AMP.

Wednesday, August 21st, 2019

Tuesday, August 20th, 2019

Picture 1 Picture 2 Picture 3
map

Checked in at American Museum of Natural History. Getting a behind-the-scenes tour — with Jessica

Monday, August 19th, 2019

Sunday, August 18th, 2019

map

Checked in at The Roxy Hotel. Hello, New York! — with Jessica

Sunday, August 11th, 2019

Saturday, August 10th, 2019

Reading Rosewater by Tade Thompson.

Replying to a tweet from @stephenhay

Any chance of providing a direct link to the audio file on that page?

Or a podcast link? (an RSS feed with audio enclosures.)

I hate to be “that guy”, but a Soundcloud embed isn’t a podcast.

Friday, August 9th, 2019

Thursday, August 8th, 2019

Wednesday, August 7th, 2019

Checked in at Jolly Brewer. Wednesday night session — with Jessica map

Checked in at Jolly Brewer. Wednesday night session — with Jessica

Replying to a tweet from @davedisasterman

Could you explain what you mean? Using navigation preload shouldn’t use any more data (or time) than a regular navigation to a URL if there were no service worker present.

Monday, August 5th, 2019

Checked in at The Lord Nelson Inn. Brighton Folk Club — with Jessica map

Checked in at The Lord Nelson Inn. Brighton Folk Club — with Jessica

Saturday, August 3rd, 2019

Thursday, August 1st, 2019

In elevating frontend to the land of Serious Code we have not just made things incredibly over-engineered but we have also set fire to all the ladders that we used to get up here in the first place.

@freezydorito