Readit Newshttps://op111.net/posts/2025/10/png-and-modern-formats-lossl...
I compare PNG and the four modern formats, AVIF, HEIF, WebP, JPEG XL, on tasks/images that PNG was designed for. (Not on photographs or lossy compression.)
https://omnicarousel.dev - Docs and demos site for Omni Carousel, a library I wrote recently
Just letting you know, that stuff is a bit confusing to screen reader users.
Though I really wish we standardized on putting content first, like mobile apps do. At least we woulnd't haave to explain to new screen reader users why getting to the f???ing article is so damn hard if you don't know the right incantations to do it quickly.
Would a Jump to navigation link next to Skip to content make this arrangement better for screen reader users?
The main navigation menu is just above the site footer in the HTML document.
Question for people who know that stuff:
What is the recommended way of hiding features that require JavaScript on browsers that do not support JavaScript, e.g., on w3m?
I tried with Windows 7 (Firefox 115) and it reports Windows 7.
It seems though that it cannot distinguish between Windows 10 and Windows 11, so, without looking further, I suppose the detection is based on the User-Agent string? (The OS version browsers report on Windows is frozen, so Windows 10 and Windows 11 have the same version there.)
It's likely that some hwaccel flag in about:config wasn't turned on by default. Similarly, if you want smooth touchpad scrolling, you need to set MOZ_USE_XINPUT2
My main Firefox in that setup is from the Mozilla repos, rather than the ESR version that is the default in Debian stable. So, it could very well be that. I will have to check to see what the ESR Firefox from the Debian repos does.
One carousel there had 16K slides.
On Windows both Chrome and Firefox managed that fine. They scrolled from start to end and back without issue and you could see, I think, all the frames in my 60Hz screen.
On GNOME and X11 (dual boot, so same hardware) Chrome was fine but there were issues with Firefox. I was curious so I logged out and logged in with Wayland. On Wayland Firefox was fine too, indistinguishable from Chrome.
I don’t understand hardware, compositors, etc., so I have no idea why that was, but it was interesting to see.
Has nothing to do with video per se. Normal embeddings, using the standard `<video>` element and no unnecessary JS nonsense, still work the same way they did in the 90s: Right click the video and download it, it's a media element like any other.
The reason why user experience is going to shite, is because turbocapitalism went to work on what was once The Internet, and is trying to turn it into a paywalled profit-machine.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/...
I have used it on a couple of client sites, and it works really well.
You can even add a thumbnail that shows before the video starts downloading/playing (the poster attribute). :-)
Is there a reason you used only synthetic images, ie, nothing from group 1?
The motivation behind the benchmarks was to understand what are the options today for optimizing the types of image we use PNG for, so I used the same set of images I had used previously in a comparison of PNG optimizers.
The reason the set does not have photographs: PNG is not good at photographs. It was not designed for that type of image.
Even so, the set could do with a bit more variety, so I want to add a few more images.