On AMP for Email

#1

Post by rodriguezcommaj » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 5:24 PM UTC

On AMP for Email
rodriguezcommaj.com

Re: On AMP for Email

#2

Post by skybrian » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 6:11 PM UTC

Re: "Amp for Email uses that language instead of HTML and CSS."

Is this correct? Looking at the example in the spec [1], it seems to be a subset of HTML.

[1] https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/issues/13457

Re: On AMP for Email

#3

Post by eveningcoffee » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 6:22 PM UTC

AMP for Email is another Googles attempt to grab more dominance by abusing their market share.

Re: On AMP for Email

#4

Post by ronnier » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 6:24 PM UTC

I really don’t care about amp for email. But I’m very worried about amp for the web because it means we give up control of our content and features and will need to live by googles rules.

Re: On AMP for Email

#5

Post by gregable » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 6:27 PM UTC

skybrian wrote: post #2

Re: "Amp for Email uses that language instead of HTML and CSS." Is this correct? Looking at the example in the spec [1], it seems to be a subset of HTML. [1] https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/issues/13457

It is just a subset of HTML (as is amp). Most email providers that accept HTML formats already only accept a subset of HTML. This is just a different, more formally defined, subset.

Re: On AMP for Email

#6

Post by aidenn0 » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 6:45 PM UTC

Enough people are coming out saying it's a terrible idea that the contrarian in me thinks is't likely to catch on now.

Re: On AMP for Email

#7

Post by patrickaljord » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 6:52 PM UTC

aidenn0 wrote: post #6

Enough people are coming out saying it's a terrible idea that the contrarian in me thinks is't likely to catch on now.

Being able to do tasks without leaving your email client is actually great, specially on mobile. Answering Doodles, filling ticket forms etc. Users are going to love this. Should we not improve the email experience just for the sake of abstract concepts such as Web Standards? Not to mention that AMP is an open spec that could be implemented by anyone and be included in web standards.

Re: On AMP for Email

#8

Post by iza » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 6:54 PM UTC

skybrian wrote: post #2

Re: "Amp for Email uses that language instead of HTML and CSS." Is this correct? Looking at the example in the spec [1], it seems to be a subset of HTML. [1] https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/issues/13457

Except you have to use tags instead of . Same for video, audio, and iframe. https://www.ampproject.org/docs/reference/spec#html-tags

Re: On AMP for Email

#9

Post by superkuh » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 6:56 PM UTC

The problem with AMP is centralization. The problem with centralization is deciding who gets to talk about what subjects. Centralization provides perverse incentives to restrict this.

That email operates as a significantly decentralized, federated set of privately run servers cuts the gordian knot of having to decide what is allowed.

AMP is a step backwards for everyone in order to make up for the terrible performance of mobile networks and smart phones.

Re: On AMP for Email

#10

Post by iamdave » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 7:00 PM UTC

patrickaljord wrote: post #7

aidenn0 wrote: post #6

Enough people are coming out saying it's a terrible idea that the contrarian in me thinks is't likely to catch on now.

Being able to do tasks without leaving your email client is actually great, specially on mobile. Answering Doodles, filling ticket forms etc. Users are going to love this. Should we not improve the email experience just for the sake of abstract concepts such as Web Standards? Not to mention that AMP is an open spec that could be implemented by anyone and be included in web standards.

Filling out web forms in emails sounds like a dream come true for phishing shops.