A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

Re:A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team by robin_reala on Thursday August 03, 2023 @06:24AM (#36983820)

We can see exactly Mozilla’s position on JPEG-XL: https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#jpegxl

JPEG-XL includes features and performance that might differentiate it from other formats, but the benefits it provides are not significant enough on their own to justify the cost of adding another raster image format to the Web.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team by worrycue on Thursday August 03, 2023 @08:32AM (#36984966)

Yet it supports AVIF, a a directly competing format ...

There is nothing neutral about supporting one format and not supporting another.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team by robin_reala on Thursday August 03, 2023 @10:10AM (#36986201)

If the functionality is effectively the same then supporting one of two formats reduces the attack surface for security exploits for little loss.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team by worrycue on Thursday August 03, 2023 @11:03AM (#36986907)

> If the functionality is effectively the same

If it were people wouldn't be pushing for JPEG-XL.

I'm not going to repeat the advantages of JEPG-XL - plenty of posts on that already.

For some bizarre reason, Mozilla chooses to back the other format - release Firefox can display AVIF right now - while leaving JPEG-XL stuck behind a flag in a Nightly.

[ Parent | on HN ]