Ok, so Mozilla won't help JPEG XL…
Overall, we don't see JPEG-XL performing enough better than its closest competitors (like AVIF) to justify addition on that basis alone. — https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/522#issuecomment-1409539985
😭
According to the results presented above, we can conclude that JXL is the superior format for both lossy and lossless operations. That is clear by only looking at the results, but we can also have a look at the features of each format. Some of them are very important.
Rob O'Leary
The next generation image format for the web is not JPEG XL?
Perhaps, the jig is not up for JPEG XL and HEIC. WebP was in Chrome for 5 years before the others decided to follow suit. The format war is a war of attrition!
TIL AVIF transformation is only available on #Cloudflare for images below 2 megapixels… 😭
https://community.cloudflare.com/t/avif-size-limit/273724/5
We need JPEG XL! 🙏
Large photos in photo pages of my photography site are now progressive JPEGs so that you can see them earlier, even if they weight more than with AVIF or WebP:
Thanks to Cloudinary and my responsive images plugin for Eleventy, it took me 10 seconds! 😍
I wish Google didn't kill JPEG XL… 😭
I also wish Largest Contenful Paint didn't wait for the full progressive image to be downloaded and rendered.
Jon gives a good overview of everything JPEG XL improves over other image formats. This article can be seen by some as biaised, as Jon is part of the team that created the format, but I really think it honestly shows clear advantages, and I hope it will help people understand JPEG XL support in browsers would be great.
Jon Sneyers