JPEG-XL as Content-Encoding?

Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws> Thu, 20 August 2020 14:14 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88AFA3A0B21 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 07:14:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yoav-ws.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ilZMuGgFgrnw for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 07:14:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87F7B3A0B18 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 07:14:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1k8lIr-0008Kc-Rj for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:12:29 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:12:29 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1k8lIr-0008Kc-Rj@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <yoav@yoav.ws>) id 1k8lIn-0008Jq-Vg for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:12:26 +0000
Received: from mail-lf1-x132.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::132]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <yoav@yoav.ws>) id 1k8lIl-0001J0-O1 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:12:25 +0000
Received: by mail-lf1-x132.google.com with SMTP id i19so1001854lfj.8 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 07:12:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yoav-ws.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=BJEHvfUe2EdDf24xkviqQxKo5nG6r59Non1AeYTjUNg=; b=kD3FnMClHajtIAiKcd/NGI6prVWgqpH7fRmoaZ+oT0LhdGKB6A+aJijmdBFEOp+c2D OIT3gXzAo2PmwZnj4LNfTstQfbKgnyhDyGC+wfrJh69yJ/fhrH5PWHxRO3IB+FE/MvtV HMIKmghOBhZ0BuSn1YJnDUbArtDiC7U81Hy74N9gb36OTwP40ezarFuRv1VlEu9IXi6o OW3Purb9kAyX5j5IUyZu5MY4sNxs2Th9DkDRYj5DIYP0a236PoED/+4Ii/7YwQKfosC3 jQzAI3nm5uw/gKw6BYZyR6xSj6lZyOGzREHWIVcydOGHnIQLZZnxp+mhW2LwgzBKjn8G 6XNA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=BJEHvfUe2EdDf24xkviqQxKo5nG6r59Non1AeYTjUNg=; b=GSE79knKvFl97nWZHADmIp344AdySzy7ai/6o1BElynqJkVNHWL1wjsge1bVMNcUv9 DljyjkE2xYRr3QFLSU20IBK2jlD7+GTgmufwMHjEBcf5qNssxGooAlZpdvtwKuKDXLWt Vw5sRixBilfF1I75e/plySK0EBDF+yIouPPZLvT3g2IheOf4kQ+adHnBjks514Zwc4nx gXYYjy4rrNUAGIdI+cwiBm4iKeokgqkH/sEMTaV+nu2upIlCpZF2K+kLxPO7yrhQ/yR8 cXhW+NdVXA6P3GK2L0kIauz+dkeKJOwE1PwE6Tay4iauRjdhCq0VOaK1fQORVut/GxbL nA5Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532P7aJ8kqlqvLV/KLxsqz0RDWX8S55MN2X8yPrBDbDWu/UwXP/z oS/2j5a0KrsJ0ga7Tu7QRkyf6SDKptcIdDnQsjb+iRNurqo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy0y+yXa2vR/Gg2yR1sExheM7k3BRfhwoZWHBVMNzQDbMQ8eIlRms3jC4oeuuNTg7OvT6O2F1yHLVVEhGrnA7U=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:6b0e:: with SMTP id d14mr1709402lfa.103.1597932730587; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 07:12:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:11:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CACj=BEjdwH1OtS=uQXsgPN3XVJvVEUeisjeF5_iro1vg0omqWQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c8393805ad4fb4a2"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::132; envelope-from=yoav@yoav.ws; helo=mail-lf1-x132.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1k8lIl-0001J0-O1 ea1065cc00fc6ef3993df779f31b606b
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: JPEG-XL as Content-Encoding?
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CACj=BEjdwH1OtS=uQXsgPN3XVJvVEUeisjeF5_iro1vg0omqWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/37940
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Hey HTTPers!

I was reviewing an intent to add JPEG-XL as a content-encoding
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CACZPrBjS75%3D%2B%3DSexFkJ7ewkBXDOF6FhkpwQYBeWn6sT57n1-_w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
for JPEG images, and thought I'd get some feedback from y'all regarding it.

The team behind JPEG-XL think that since it can be used to
seamlessly transform JPEGs, it might be interesting to enable that
transformation to happen at the HTTP layer and get ~20% smaller images
*automagically*, as compression would be done by supporting web servers and
image compression providers.

I'm slightly more skeptical about how automatic that would be, and find it
somewhat strange to have image-specific content-encoding, while other image
formats are served as separate mime types and negotiated with `Accept`.

So, a few questions:

   - Would it make sense to have an image specific content-encoding?
   - Are web servers more likely to perform JPEG=>JPXL transformations if
   JPXL is a content encoding, compared to browser support for it as an image
   format?
      - Note that those transformations are CPU heavy, so will need to be
      cached, or done at "build" time.
   - Same question for CDNs
   - Finally for CDNs who already transform images - have you run into
   compatibility issues coming from web content manipulating raw image bytes
   directly, and failing to do that post-transformation?

I'd highly appreciate y'all's opinions!

Cheers :)
Yoav