Google unkills JPEG XL?
tonisagrista.com
Google unkills JPEG XL?
1–10 of 283 posts
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#2Cool, that means it'll appear in ebook reading systems in five to ten years.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#3As 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.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#4As 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.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#5Cool, that means it'll appear in ebook reading systems in five to ten years.
That seems optimistic...
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#6As 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.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#7As 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.
honestly hate webp so happy about this
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#8Cool, 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.
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#9As 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.
>Because Mozilla's stance on JPEG XL and XSLT are identical to Google's.
Okay, and do they align on every other web standard too?
Re: Google unkills JPEG XL?
#10Earlier 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.
> Because Mozilla's stance on JPEG XL and XSLT are identical to Google's. Okay, and do they align on every other web standard too?
Usually it’s Mozilla not wanting to implement something Google wants to implement, not the other way around.