OblomovWhile I agree with the @fsf warning about the emblematic value of the decision by #Google to pull support for #JpegXL from #Chrome, their article <https://u.fsf.org/3z8> is as empty as could be, _especially_ considering that #GNU #IceCat doesn't support JPEG XL either (being based on a #Firefox branch that doesn't build #JXL support in.) You want to show that #FLOSS can do without? Do it by actually supporting what you complain Google is failing to.
As I've already mentioned elsewhere (https://sociale.network/@oblomov/110073403788621333 http://wok.oblomov.eu/tecnologia/opera-requiem-3/ etc), much more so than #Google's abuse of its dominant position, the responsibility for the loss of the open web lies on the shoulder of the minority browsers. Why isn't #Mozilla shipping #JpegXL support in current releases of #Firefox? What about any other browser, #FLOSS or not, pretending to be interested in the #openWeb?
Oblomov (@[email protected])
The recent developments have made me realize that I should probably write a #FirefoxRequiem series not unlike the #OperaRequiem I started when the first news of its sellout came around, but the truth is that I've never been invested in #Mozilla #Firefox the way I was in the #OperaBrowser, and @[email protected]'s failure (intentional or not) to keep their browser at the forefront of the defense of #OpenStandards and a free web really doesn't help.
The only browser I actually know of that _can_ support #JpegXL is #OtterBrowser https://otter-browser.org/ —a basically one-man effort to wrap the classic Opera/Presto UX on top of Qt-based web engines— and even then under the very specific conditions that the QtWebKit engine is used, with an environment variable set to enable support for “unsafe” formats (this, BTW, enables support for #MNG too).
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to give any weight to anybody talking about the #openWeb unless they start putting actual effort in to break through Google's monopoly. And if you ever dare talk about something like #JpegXL, you'd better do it from a position of credibility, which means supporting in the first place.
For #Firefox and its forks, this means enabling it out of the box for main builds. For #Blink-based browsers (@Vivaldi are you listening?), this means rolling back Google's patch to remove it, and help maintain it with community effort. Ditto for #WebKit. The #openWeb needs something like what the #DocumentFoundation did for the office productivity suites and formats.
Well, this is interesting: there is already a community-supported patch for #Chromium derivatives that restores #JpegXL suppot
https://github.com/Alex313031/thorium-libjxl
I'm looking forward to it being adopted by Linux distributions that roll their own Chromium, and by other Blink-based browsers with a claimed interest in open standards (glances at #VivaldiBrowser @Vivaldi)
https://github.com/Alex313031/thorium-libjxl
I'm looking forward to it being adopted by Linux distributions that roll their own Chromium, and by other Blink-based browsers with a claimed interest in open standards (glances at #VivaldiBrowser @Vivaldi)
GitHub - Alex313031/thorium-libjxl: libjxl for Chromium - restores JPEG-XL functionality to Thorium/Chromium post M109
libjxl for Chromium - restores JPEG-XL functionality to Thorium/Chromium post M109 - GitHub - Alex313031/thorium-libjxl: libjxl for Chromium - restores JPEG-XL functionality to Thorium/Chromium pos...
Vivaldi Browser@oblomov Hey, could you submit a feature request with this to our forum?
https://forum.vivaldi.net/category/185/desktop-feature-requests
@Vivaldi the is already a features requests for it:
https://forum.vivaldi.net/topic/85153/adding-support-for-jpeg-xl-jxl-images (the Thorium patch is mentioned in one of the comments)
https://forum.vivaldi.net/topic/85153/adding-support-for-jpeg-xl-jxl-images (the Thorium patch is mentioned in one of the comments)
@oblomov Okay, thank you! :D Upvote it if you haven't, but that's very good.