> In the end [JPEG XL] is just a codec and the the main purpose of it is to allow you to forget that there *is* a codec – and to just use images. For me [codecs are] very interesting at the technical level, but the goal is to just make images work seamlessly.
@eeeps @jaffathecake for screen content, JPEG XL does have some good coding tools like Patches, but making an encoder that uses them effectively hasn't really been a priority yet.
This specific example though should really be served as HTML and SVG, not as any raster image format ;)
Left: current stable Chrome (M143)
Right: Chrome Canary (M145)
Huge thanks to the people working tirelessly on the new Rust-based jxl-rs decoder!
Chrome is considering shipping JPEG XL support!
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/WjCKcBw219k/m/NmOyvMCCBAAJ?pli=1
@jaffathecake I think for the web, the two key features of jxl compared to other formats are:
1. Reliable and very effective high-fidelity lossy compression, in particular for HDR images which I hope will get traction on the web in the near future;
2. Lossless JPEG recompression: a no-brainer to improve delivery of existing legacy images for which only already-compressed versions exist.
There are other nice things like progressive decoding, future-proof format design, across-the-workflow, etc
Eric Portis
Moritz Firsching