Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google unkills JPEG XL?

tonisagrista.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 283 posts

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#11

Post by _jzlw »

SquareWheel wrote: post #6
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #3

As a monopoly, Google should be barred from having standards positions and be legally required to build and support the web standards as determined by other parties. The insanity that the web platform is just "whatever Google's whims are" remains insane and mercurial. The web platform should not be as inconsistent as Google's own product strategies, wonder if XSLT will get unkilled in a few months.

Which other parties? Because Mozilla's stance on JPEG XL and XSLT are identical to Google's. They don't want to create a maintenance burden for features that offer little benefit over existing options.

Didn't Mozilla basically say they would support it if Google does? Mozilla doesn't have the resources to maintain a feature that no one can actually use; they're barely managing to keep up with the latest standards as it is.

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#12

Post by nilamo »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #3

As a monopoly, Google should be barred from having standards positions and be legally required to build and support the web standards as determined by other parties. The insanity that the web platform is just "whatever Google's whims are" remains insane and mercurial. The web platform should not be as inconsistent as Google's own product strategies, wonder if XSLT will get unkilled in a few months.

Barred by who? There is no governing body who can do such a thing, currently. As it is, nothing stops any random person or organization from creating any new format.

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#13

Post by m348e912 »

A full-resolution, maximum-size JPEG XL image (1,073,741,823 × 1,073,741,824):

Uncompressed: 3.5–7 exabytes Realistically compressed: Tens to hundreds of petabytes

Thats a serious high-res image

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#14

Post by lloydatkinson »

bigbuppo wrote: post #4
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #3

As a monopoly, Google should be barred from having standards positions and be legally required to build and support the web standards as determined by other parties. The insanity that the web platform is just "whatever Google's whims are" remains insane and mercurial. The web platform should not be as inconsistent as Google's own product strategies, wonder if XSLT will get unkilled in a few months.

Well, they said they would unkill xslt if someone would rewrite and maintain it so that it's not the abandonware horrorshow it was. As for JPEG XL, of course they unkilled it. WEBP has been deprecated in favor of JPEG XL.

Webp deprecated? According to what?

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#15

Post by dweekly »

Prior HN posts/discussions:

Chromium Team Re-Opens JPEG XL Feature Ticket https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46018994

FSF Slams Google over Dropping JPEG-XL in Chrome https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35589179

Google set to deprecate JPEG XL support in Chrome 110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33399940

Chromium jpegxl issue closed as won't fix https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40407475

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#16

Post by simonw »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #3

As a monopoly, Google should be barred from having standards positions and be legally required to build and support the web standards as determined by other parties. The insanity that the web platform is just "whatever Google's whims are" remains insane and mercurial. The web platform should not be as inconsistent as Google's own product strategies, wonder if XSLT will get unkilled in a few months.

Having key browser implementers not involved in the standards processes is what lead us to the W3C wasting several years chasing XHTML 2.0.

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#17

Post by _jzlw »

PaulHoule wrote: post #8
Finnucane wrote: post #2

Cool, that means it'll appear in ebook reading systems in five to ten years.

It'll be in PDF sooner, and my experience is that PDF >> any other system for ebooks. I liked the idea of EPUB but when I recently installed an EPUB reader to read some files I was shocked at how awful it looked whereas for 15 years I've been reading PDF files on tablets with relish.

Have you ever tried reading a PDF ebook on a phone? Small font size, doesn't fill the entire screen (phones are taller), margins make it appear even smaller... even if you have good eyesight it's a pain. The whole point of PDF is to preserve a page layout as authored. EPUB is meant to adapt to your device.

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#18

Post by ChrisArchitect »

dweekly wrote: post #15

Prior HN posts/discussions: Chromium Team Re-Opens JPEG XL Feature Ticket https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46018994 FSF Slams Google over Dropping JPEG-XL in Chrome https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35589179 Google set to deprecate JPEG XL support in Chrome 110 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33399940 Chromium jpegxl issue closed as won't fix https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40407475

[dupe]

Main recent discussion:

Google Revisits JPEG XL in Chromium After Earlier Removal

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46021179

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#19

Post by philipallstar »

_jzlw wrote: post #11
SquareWheel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which other parties? Because Mozilla's stance on JPEG XL and XSLT are identical to Google's. They don't want to create a maintenance burden for features that offer little benefit over existing options.

Didn't Mozilla basically say they would support it if Google does? Mozilla doesn't have the resources to maintain a feature that no one can actually use; they're barely managing to keep up with the latest standards as it is.

They have many millions to spend on engineers. They should do that.

Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?

#20

Post by ocdtrekkie »

simonw wrote: post #16
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #3

As a monopoly, Google should be barred from having standards positions and be legally required to build and support the web standards as determined by other parties. The insanity that the web platform is just "whatever Google's whims are" remains insane and mercurial. The web platform should not be as inconsistent as Google's own product strategies, wonder if XSLT will get unkilled in a few months.

Having key browser implementers not involved in the standards processes is what lead us to the W3C wasting several years chasing XHTML 2.0.

There are other key browser implementers. Google should not have more than an advisory role in any standards organization.
Post reply on HN