Skip Navigation
Technology @lemmy.world AnActOfCreation @programming.dev

Browser maker love-in snubs Google-shunned JPEG XL

www.theregister.com Browser maker love-in snubs Google-shunned JPEG XL

Fans of the spec bemoan lack of transparency in Interop 2024 process

Browser maker love-in snubs Google-shunned JPEG XL
  • Browser makers Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla have announced Interop 2024, a project to promote web browser interoperability.
  • JPEG XL, a potential replacement for JPEG and PNG image formats, was not included in Interop 2024.
  • The rejection of JPEG XL has been blamed on Google, with the Google Chrome team deciding not to support the image compression technology.

Archive link: https://archive.ph/nulY6

66

You're viewing a single thread.

66 comments

  • Thanks to wasm, you don't have to bow to Google's whim and can choose to include jpeg xl support on your websites if you want: https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js

    • Do you know if it uses the native decoder if available (so, in Safari I guess)? Doesn't say in the readme.

      • I believe so. This line in the source code means it'll only attempt the decoding if an img element for a .jxl image url fails to load.

        If you're on safari, you can verify it by going to the demo page at https://niutech.github.io/jxl.js/ and inspect the image element. If the src attributes contain blob, then it's decoded using the wasm decoder. If the src attribute contains url to a .jxl file, then it's decoded natively.

    • I read "wasm" as per "wasp" -- white, Anglo-Saxon -- and then my brain create "men" because Protestant didn't make sense. And I continued to read the sentence until context didn't make sense.

      But it still kind of does.

      (Yes, I know web assembly is a thing. Just making conversation.)

66 comments