undefined | Better HN

0 pointsyboris2y ago0 comments

Their decision is schizophrenic: the JPEG XL format is a combination of two technologies: PIK (developed by Google) and FLIF (developed by Cloudinary) - one of them developed by Google. It is entirely sensible for them to reverse their decision, which came before Safari announced the format would be supported.

Adobe is already supporting the format, and many image editors / browsers are including it.

Finally, adding a WASM polyfil to your website would still yield many benefits, enough to outweigh not-100%-yet-support-by-browsers.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

themerone2y ago· 2 in thread

Not schizophrenic, it was political.

The guy behind web-p has more clout with the chrome team.

carbotaniuman2y ago

From my very very limited understanding, the amount of influence webp (compared to even say AVIF) people have seems disproportionate compared to how useful it's been.

formerly_proven2y ago

wdym webp is really good at serving artifacted images with slightly fewer bits per pixel than jpeg. nobody uses jpeg qualities over 50, right?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse