What does that even mean? AMP is built on WebComponents, which are an existing web standard. That's no less standard than anything else using custom elements.
Nowhere in the standard "higher search ranking on google inc" is mentioned as a must have feature. Yet it is the only feature anyone care about when discussing adoption.
If that were true (and I'm not so sure it is), then you'd blame the search team for letting it be a ranking factor. It has nothing to do with web standards.
You are not wrong (about what is on the standards). But you are being downvoted because everyone who did implement AMP in the real world, did so for the SEO benefits.
Oh I have votes disabled on social media. I'd rather form my own opinion when reading comments.
Regarding AMP, I appraised it from a speed perspective and found it partially effective, but only a bandaid fix. Addressing real site speed issues is the better approach.
They are caching a chunk of the web and routing traffic from google.com to their cache. Since traffic never leaves google.com, it is now in a way the web itself. This is achieved thanks to AMP.
Technically that's AMP Cache, not AMP itself, but I get your point. It's worth noting however that both Cloudflare and Bing also run their own instances of AMP Cache.
