4 ms·

Starting from v145 Chrome supports JXL. There is also an extension for this: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/jpeg-xl-viewer/bkhdlfmkaenamnlbpdfplekldl

by senfiaj 9mo ago

Starting from v145 Chrome supports JXL. There is also an extension for this: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/jpeg-xl-viewer/bkhdlfmkaenamnlbpdfplekldlnghchp https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/jpeg-xl-viewer/bkhd...

pkulak 9mo ago
And Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/jxl/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/jxl/
- breve 9mo ago
  It's a good use case for WebAssembly. For browsers that don't yet support JPEG XL natively the page could provide a wasm decoder. Like this demo page: https://bevara.github.io/Showcase/libjxl/ https://bevara.github.io/Showcase/libjxl/
- Santosh83 9mo ago
  Wonderful. Allow an "unmonitored" extension from a random stranger on the Internet have access to "all data for all websites" just to support an image format for which Mozilla should have long built in native support...
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - Vinnl 9mo ago
    Security concerns are exactly the reason the format doesn't have native support yet. However: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064
    - deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
    - bmacho 9mo ago
      That's not the reason, but the excuse. The reason Firefox doesn't have jxl is that it is funded by Google, and someone at Google decided that it has to die. Also the parent comment was about that you really shouldn't just let a random Russian guy run any javascript on any website you visit, that's stupid. Also also, am I missing something, or Firefox extensions are broken, there is no way to limit an extension to websites (allow or disallow), or even just to check the source code of an extension?
      - lonjil 9mo ago
        > That's not the reason, but the excuse. The reason firefox doesn't have jxl is that it is funded by Google, and someone at Google decided that it has to die. So what, you think they were just lying when they said that they'll ship JXL when it has a Rust implementation? You think Mozilla devs were just bluffing when they were working directly with the JXL devs over the last year to make sure everything would work right?
        bmacho 9mo ago
        No, I don't think they can withhold support if it's a no-brainer to support it. But they also tried everything they could to not support it.
      - Vinnl 9mo ago
        The link I posted shows that Jpeg-XL will come to Firefox, and that that same Google is the one making that possible by writing a secure implementation.
  - mikae1 9mo ago
    This... I would not install non-recommended Firefox addons for things that can be achieved in about:config. Just do set image.jxl.enabled flag in about:config to true.
- iam-TJ 9mo ago
  Firefox Nightly v149 has added experimental support via Settings > Firefox Labs: Webpage Display Media: JPEG XL With this feature enabled, Nightly supports the JPEG XL (JXL) format. This is an enhanced image file format that supports lossless transition from traditional JPEG files. See bug 1539075 for more details.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]

by senfiaj 9mo ago

pkulak 9mo ago

And Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/jxl/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/jxl/

breve 9mo ago
It's a good use case for WebAssembly. For browsers that don't yet support JPEG XL natively the page could provide a wasm decoder. Like this demo page: https://bevara.github.io/Showcase/libjxl/ https://bevara.github.io/Showcase/libjxl/
Santosh83 9mo ago
Wonderful. Allow an "unmonitored" extension from a random stranger on the Internet have access to "all data for all websites" just to support an image format for which Mozilla should have long built in native support...
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- Vinnl 9mo ago
  Security concerns are exactly the reason the format doesn't have native support yet. However: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - bmacho 9mo ago
    That's not the reason, but the excuse. The reason Firefox doesn't have jxl is that it is funded by Google, and someone at Google decided that it has to die. Also the parent comment was about that you really shouldn't just let a random Russian guy run any javascript on any website you visit, that's stupid. Also also, am I missing something, or Firefox extensions are broken, there is no way to limit an extension to websites (allow or disallow), or even just to check the source code of an extension?
    - lonjil 9mo ago
      > That's not the reason, but the excuse. The reason firefox doesn't have jxl is that it is funded by Google, and someone at Google decided that it has to die. So what, you think they were just lying when they said that they'll ship JXL when it has a Rust implementation? You think Mozilla devs were just bluffing when they were working directly with the JXL devs over the last year to make sure everything would work right?
      - bmacho 9mo ago
        No, I don't think they can withhold support if it's a no-brainer to support it. But they also tried everything they could to not support it.
    - Vinnl 9mo ago
      The link I posted shows that Jpeg-XL will come to Firefox, and that that same Google is the one making that possible by writing a secure implementation.
- mikae1 9mo ago
  This... I would not install non-recommended Firefox addons for things that can be achieved in about:config. Just do set image.jxl.enabled flag in about:config to true.
iam-TJ 9mo ago
Firefox Nightly v149 has added experimental support via Settings > Firefox Labs: Webpage Display Media: JPEG XL With this feature enabled, Nightly supports the JPEG XL (JXL) format. This is an enhanced image file format that supports lossless transition from traditional JPEG files. See bug 1539075 for more details.
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]