This situation seems utterly absurd. There is so much talk from Mozilla about mozJpeg, improving lossy compression etc..etc..
But this completely misses the point and the benefit of WebP for a lot of us. In our case we really couldn't give two hoots about the the kb savings of webp over jpeg. For us it's the transparency support. Our app completely requires huge transparent images. In Chrome we simply serve single webp files of about 100kb. In Firefox we are forced to either serve 2mb+ png's (which of course is ridiculous) or perform a horrid hack as follows: - Serve a jpeg for the color data - Serve a separate png file that includes the transparency data - Combine them client side using the canvas element to produce a single transparent image. This effectively doubles data transfer compared to using webp alone, doubles the number of network requests and most importantly for us puts extra strain on the client in order to combine so many of these images. For the life of me I cannot understand why Mozilla are completely ignoring the same developers who's support and praise shot Firefox to fame only a few years ago. It is clear from the number of posts, threads, bug reports and topics regarding webp that it is something everyone wants. Everyone that is apart from Mozilla for some completely unfathomable reason. I find it extremely sad to have to recommend Chrome to everyone these days. _______________________________________________ dev-media mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-media
