Technology

59598 readers

3448 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

213

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

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

66 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago

Converting from jpeg to jxl comes some serious space savings and can be done losslessly.

The original image formats for the web, jpeg, gif, png, all have major benefits compared to each other. That's why they were successful.

We change video formats without any major benefits of one over the other. I think it's totally reasonable to do the same with image formats. Especially the data can be losslessly compressed even more.

I wouldn't call speed a major factor for image processing anyway. It's hugely important for movies, where AVIF is coming from, but much less so when there is no hard 30x2160x3840 pixels/s benchmark you need to reach.