Theme Developers

(...) #1

I am not looking to make a theme for retail. I am actually trying to build a Google AMP theme for personal use. Before I begin going crazy trying to fix an unfixable problem–is it possible to make a RW theme without using any JS script or external CSS, etc. links of any kind?

(Jannis from inStacks Software) #2

In short: yes.

What are the detailed requirements for AMP?

(...) #3

The biggest advantage is that Google caches the pages on their servers so no bandwidth and fast speed! Disadvantage, limited design parameters and functionality, though it is becoming better all the time!

(...) #4

This tool and base code gives you a clue as to how simple they require it all.

(...) #5

BTW: this is a bit of a moving target. The project is actively being developed and always will be. The most important thing to remember is that if a page does not validate perfectly, Google will not use it at all. Even if it once validated and the target moved they will delist it.

(Will Woodgate) #6

That’s the reason I’ve not explored this any further. Unlike the Washington Post who have a team of developers that can test and update their AMP site 24/7, a lot of individuals and companies don’t have that sort of resource expenditure. If AMP becomes more stable and future-proof, then of course it is something I’m sure many more will consider.

For now, it is feasible to build extremely lightweight websites in RapidWeaver. Some of the earlier themes were completely self-contained and no more complex than a regular HTML email template. I reckon it would be feasible to create a highly optimised theme that could rival a website you build with AMP (from a speed and responsive perspective). Of course, there would be quite a lot of functionality to axe from a conventional theme - like support for ExtraContent, theme style and colour settings and links opening in new windows - removal of which diminishes the marketability of such a theme. But if it’s just for yourself, then it could work well.

(Michael Frankland) #7

Great feedback @willwood

I was looking at this too @Flash and it seemed a lot of work and constant monitoring to be worth small gain perhaps.

How about start with a theme that has all local CSS/JS and minify things, image optimisation, add a cache and go from there?

Interested to hear how this goes

(...) #8

The most important thing is the SEO factor. @yuzool, @willwood, @instacks

(Will Woodgate) #10

Excellent SEO is still feasible with RapidWeaver. And remember that many other search engines exist in addition to Google. Whatever Google decides to push isn’t necessarily going to be reflected by all other other big players in the search engine business and social media.

(...) #11

Agreed, but you cannot get some of the positions without AMP

(Rob D) #12

Technology or technique is not all that matters for good SEO positioning. As a matter of fact, I would argue that it is one of the last things that matter.

(...) #13

I am not going to get into a pissing fight with anyone on this but the research is showing that in fact having AMP matters. That said content is still king but having AMP is in SOME cases the only way to get certain types of listings for your website using Google SERP.

I will not comment anymore on this. It is simply something I was trying to figure out in regards to using RW as the content builder rather than hand code or using a Goliath like Wordpress.

(Rob D) #14

Sorry, Flash, I had no idea that I could ruffle your feathers so easily…:kissing_closed_eyes:

(Aaron Marquez) #15

@Flash I think the point the others were making is that it isn’t essential to have a successful website. If you are, say, a landscaper or interior designer, having AMP isn’t going to make that much of a difference in local search results.

If you are a blogger / author who is constantly posting, then this may contribute somewhat.

The Google algorithm still cares more about content optimization – but the focus IS gradually increasing towards performance + design optimization.

(...) #16

I can see how that was misinterpreted. Sorry folks! My intention was to simply say my point and not take the thread further of topic. There was NO offense taken and certainly none meant! Are we good?

(Rob D) #17

Absolutely! No point going into it any further…