3 ms·

Well, nevertheless we should all move forward to JPEG XL as the commonly agreed on next-gen image format, as soon as it becomes generally available with other m

Well, nevertheless we should all move forward to JPEG XL as the commonly agreed on next-gen image format, as soon as it becomes generally available with other major browsers. (Google has demonstrably the code to render this. If they decide to stay outside for political reasons, well, so be it.)

oliwarner 4y ago
Other major browsers?
- masswerk 4y ago
  https://jpegxl.io/articles/browser-support/ https://jpegxl.io/articles/browser-support/ (Webkit seems to have basic integration ready, but to be still working on color profile decoding and animations [1]; Firefox seems to be fairly complete. What other Chromium-based browsers are going to do, remains to be seen. I hope, they will decide to patch the code to support JPEG XL.) [1] Webkit has a quite dedicated declaration on its related ticket, "JPEG XL is the future of all image formats." https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208235 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208235 ---- P.S.: If this was meant as a snarky remark on market shares, well… (I'd be happy to see the bias towards Chrome somewhat diminishing, especially in developer communities. If folks would start developing in other browsers according to web standards and then test with Chrome, some common perceptions may shift.)
  - oliwarner 4y ago
    > If this was meant as a snarky remark on market share It was. I'm a Firefox user, and web developer. Features live and die based on their caniuse profile. I'd love to deploy JXL but I can't if Chrome Devs hold this attitude. Doesn't really matter what other browsers do at this point.