Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which standard requires support of JXL?
The PDF association apparently recently added jpeg xl to the pdf spec and indicated that it's the preferred solution for HDR content.
Google unkills JPEG XL?
101–110 of 283 posts
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#102Isn't this due to the 100M+ line C++ multi-threaded dependency being a potential nightmare when you are dealing with images in browsers/emails/etc. as an attack surface? I think both Mozilla and Google are OK with this - if it is written in Rust in order to avoid that situation. I know the linked post mentions this but isn't that the crux of the whole thing? The standard itself is clearly an improvement over what we'…
100M+ is a bit more than i would expect for an image format. have i not been paying attention
100MLOC for an image format would be bananas. You could fit the entire codebases of a couple of modern operating systems, a handful of AAA videogames, and still have room for several web apps and command line utilities in 100MLOC.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about the users and web authors?
Saying web users should define web standards is like saying laptop users should design CPUs. They lack the expertise to do this meaningfully. Web authors? Maybe. WHATWG was created specifically because W3C wasn’t really listening to web authors though. I don’t think there are a lot of scenarios where standards aren’t driven by implementers, though. USB, DRAM, WiFi, all this stuff is defined by implementers.
Rather: WHATWG was founded because the companies developing browsers (in particular Google) believed that what the W3C was working on for XHTML 2.0 was too academic, and went into a different direction than their (i.e. in particular Google's) vision for the web.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#104> Yes, right, “not enough interest from the entire ecosystem”. Sure. Well tbf, the only time I ever hear about JPEG XL is when people complain about Chrome not having it. I think that might be its only actual use case.
https://petapixel.com/2024/09/18/why-apple-uses-jpeg-xl-in-t...
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Have you seen JPEG XL source code? I like the format, but the reference implementation in C++ looked pretty bad at least 2 years ago. I hope they rewrote it, because it surely looked like a security issue waiting to happen. At this point, in 2025, any substantial (non-degenerative) image processing written in C++ is a security issue waiting to happen. That's not specific to JPEG XL.
And yet whole of HN is VERY VERY angry because Google won't ship that pile of C++ into most popular software (and app framework) in the world.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#106Isn't this due to the 100M+ line C++ multi-threaded dependency being a potential nightmare when you are dealing with images in browsers/emails/etc. as an attack surface? I think both Mozilla and Google are OK with this - if it is written in Rust in order to avoid that situation. I know the linked post mentions this but isn't that the crux of the whole thing? The standard itself is clearly an improvement over what we'…
It would need to be written in the Safe Rust subset to give safety assurances. It's an important distinction.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#107Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#108As 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.
Nobody is stopping you from using jpegxl.
In a very real sense Google is currently stopping web authors from using JPEG XL.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
>and my experience is that PDF >> any other system for ebooks. Are you speaking just about technical books? Because I can’t imagine anyone trying to read a novel in epub vs pdf on a phone or epub reader and going with the latter.