DirectControlAssumed t1_iufqu7f wrote on October 30, 2022 at 11:52 PM

Reply to comment by emfiliane in Google Chrome Is Already Preparing To Deprecate JPEG-XL by leo_sk5

Well, compiling stuff with appropriate flags isn't easy for people who are not programmers. Most of them probably would just give up.

Even if that wasn't a problem I still don't like the idea of putting my precious images into the shaky state of dependence on some format that is susceptible to whims of a single company.

In the end of the day Google didn't really wanted ultimate-rule-them-all image format, they just need something that requires less bandwidth from their networks than JPEG. AVIF and WebP seem to be good enough for that role now. But this is basically endless battle - tomorrow they'll start thinking about even more compact formats and will declare JPEG XL/AVIF/WebP obsolete effectively abandoning them. If nobody else takes the burden of their maintenance in their hands, the files using these formats will become a large PITA for their owners.

JPEG 2000 is already here and one of its primary usages is exactly digital preservation, e.g it is one of the preferred formats of Library of Congress (with TIFF, JPG and PNG)

EDIT: https://www.phoronix.com/news/Chrome-Dropping-JPEG-XL-Reasons

RIP JPEG XL, even your own creator hasn't really liked you.

emfiliane t1_iufs7yq wrote on October 31, 2022 at 12:03 AM

Sure, I use j2k (and djvu) every day. They're one possible format to transfer archived files and scans to, although being business, PDF/A is preferred over any raw image format in this group.

I'm just saying that major public formats don't just disappear, even if they become inconvenient to use; most major obsolete undocumented formats are still usable in some inconvenient way or another.

DirectControlAssumed t1_iuftz7f wrote on October 31, 2022 at 12:17 AM

>I'm just saying that major public formats don't just disappear, even if they become inconvenient to use; most major obsolete undocumented formats are still usable in some inconvenient way or another.

I agree with that.

> They're one possible format to transfer archived files and scans to, although being business, PDF/A is preferred over any raw image format in this group.

AFAIK, PDF/A-2+ allows J2K images, so it works there too (if you want it) and, as you obviously know, PDF/A exists precisely for digital preservation.

Also, AFAIK, Adobe hasn't allowed any other "JPEG successors" in their PDF standard, either.