Thank you Yaowu Xu for providing the link to the tests. However, being made by AVIF engineers, aren't they skewed towards AVIF format? For example, Cloudinary conducted a test with contradictory results, where "JPEG XL can obtain 10 to 15% better compression than AVIF" and "JPEG XL encoding is about three times as fast as AVIF"[1 <https://cloudinary.com/blog/the-case-for-jpeg-xl#lossy_compression_performance>]. Keep in mind that the libjxl implementation is only at version 0.7.0, so there is still room for performance improvement. In your test results JPEG XL provides more efficient lossless images compression[2 <https://storage.googleapis.com/avif-comparison/images/main/charts/Main_Lossless_filesize_AVIF_JPEG-XL_WebP_900w.png>]. So why have you dropped JPEG XL support in Chrome when it is a better lossless format, among other features like progressive decoding? Even you colleagues at Google have bet on JPEG XL by developing Attention Center Model with an JPEG XL encoder[3 <https://opensource.googleblog.com/2022/12/open-sourcing-attention-center-model.html> ]. Please reconsider your decision.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/b2dd8917-81af-4b6b-b8db-7feacf7d09d0n%40chromium.org.
