Browser maker love-in snubs Google-shunned JPEG XL
Browser maker love-in snubs Google-shunned JPEG XL
Fans of the spec bemoan lack of transparency in Interop 2024 process
- Browser makers Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla have announced Interop 2024, a project to promote web browser interoperability.
- JPEG XL, a potential replacement for JPEG and PNG image formats, was not included in Interop 2024.
- The rejection of JPEG XL has been blamed on Google, with the Google Chrome team deciding not to support the image compression technology.
Archive link: https://archive.ph/nulY6
You're viewing a single thread.
Am I having a stroke, or is this headline horrendously written?
253 0 ReplyI read it four times and I still don't understand what love-in means.
98 0 ReplyDumb way of saying orgy.
36 0 ReplyI still don't understand. WTF are we talking about. This is tech news, not a celeb scandal. Why can't we just use simple words !
13 1 ReplyWhy say lot word when few word do trick?
8 0 Reply
What's the smart way?
7 1 ReplyOrgy.
20 0 ReplyDinner Party. I think group sex is just implied, right?
7 1 ReplyI did decline a event because it said "Dinner Party" in quotes.
When they explained, they meant because it's not really dinner but snacks and board games. Shame. Was expecting orgy
5 1 ReplyThat’s called “Game Night”
Don’t ever go to a game night that is called a “dinner party” anyway. You’re likely to get roped into their self-created board game that is, “okay so it’s got a lot of rules and 1400 pieces, but I’ve written them all down on this 20 page spiral bound document and everyone will get a copy and an hour to read”
P.s. Fuck you Aaron, I will never come to your “dinner party” again.
10 1 ReplyHahahah, upvote for including the tidbit with your PS and not making us ask.
As someone with very limited short-term/working memory, I feel your pain.
3 1 Reply
I believe you just responded to a message with the answer to your question.
1 0 Reply
Horrible headline.
Browser maker love-in
Chromium (used by most browsers)
snubs
doesn't support
Google-shunned JPEG XL
JPEG XL (because Google doesn't like it)
43 0 ReplyIt was chrome and Firefox both who were against the format, both saying too expensive to implement for too small a benefit
7 1 ReplyThank you. I legitimately could not understand the title.
2 0 Reply
Something about love in subs for Google ? And also JPEG?
5 0 ReplyI think these days that's the rule, if it piques your interest but you have some trouble understanding headline, you may just click on the article
4 0 ReplyThe register is doing this shit for years. They are trying to sound smart...
3 0 Reply