News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive. Parent comment

Re:Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive by reificator on Sunday December 03, 2017 @07:14AM (#15837266)
> I don't think this is hostile to developers at all, unless AMP is already hostile.

I think the prevailing opinion on Hacker News is exactly that.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive by baddox on Monday December 04, 2017 @01:39AM (#15841943)
My impression is that HN’s hostility toward AMP is caused less by the spec itself and more by Google’s leverage of its market power in search to incentivize AMP adoption, as well as its “web-breaking” behavior (like sending you to ugly and self-serving google.com/amp/whatever URLs).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive by tree_of_item on Sunday December 03, 2017 @10:23AM (#15837934)
I don't see how a subset of HTML could be hostile. AMP is not Google Search.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maintaining an Independent Browser Is Expensive by krapp on Sunday December 03, 2017 @08:15PM (#15840758)
A subset of HTML isn't hostile. A browser that defaults to only rendering that subset is hostile, because it relegates any content which doesn't conform to that proprietary spec to second-class status.
[ Parent | on HN ]