amp-iframe guideline to prefer existing components#7264
Merged
Conversation
cramforce
requested changes
Jan 31, 2017
extensions/amp-iframe/amp-iframe.md
Outdated
| `amp-iframe` should be considered a fallback if the required user experience is not possible by other means in AMP. This is because there are many benefits to using a component tailored for a specific use-case instead, such as | ||
|
|
||
| - Better resource management and performance | ||
| - Increased loading priority (`amp-iframe` loads last, because AMP doesn't know what's inside of it) |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Got it—is there anything we can say around better loading priority for specific components v. amp-iframe, or should this line just be deleted?
extensions/amp-iframe/amp-iframe.md
Outdated
| - Better resource management and performance | ||
| - Increased loading priority (`amp-iframe` loads last, because AMP doesn't know what's inside of it) | ||
| - Custom components can provide built-in placeholder images in some cases. This means getting, say, the right video thumbnail before a video loads, and reduces the coding effort to add a placeholder manually. | ||
| - Built-in resize requests. This means that iframe content with unpredictable size can more often appear to the user as if it were native to the page, rather than in a scrollable frame |
extensions/amp-iframe/amp-iframe.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| See [amp-iframe rules](https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/extensions/amp-iframe/0.1/validator-amp-iframe.protoascii) in the AMP validator specification. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Guideline: prefer existing AMP components to `amp-iframe` |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
s/existing/specific
Please add link to list of components.
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks for the feedback—should be updated to address the comments now |
cramforce
reviewed
Jan 31, 2017
|
|
||
| See [amp-iframe rules](https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/extensions/amp-iframe/0.1/validator-amp-iframe.protoascii) in the AMP validator specification. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Guideline: prefer [specific AMP components](https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/tree/master/extensions) to `amp-iframe` |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When this goes into the docs site, please check that the link there points to the right destination. CC @pbakaus
cramforce
approved these changes
Jan 31, 2017
torch2424
pushed a commit
to torch2424/amphtml
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 14, 2017
mrjoro
pushed a commit
to mrjoro/amphtml
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 28, 2017
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Thought it would be good to document this somewhere, but want to make sure it's accurate and useful. Not sure who is the best person to review, but /to @cramforce as a first guess, given the component history