| ▲ | yeargun 2 days ago | |
If you plan to serve your image with a self contained, single pack. Then with html + rasterized images (.jpeg/.png, ..) you would have to pay extra size overhead caused by base64. With hmml, you dont | ||
| ▲ | mpeg 2 days ago | parent [-] | |
I get that, but the drawbacks outweigh the benefits imho and the b64 overhead is not solved, just deferred. Say I want to distribute an hmml file as a single file, I'd have to create an html with the embedded js runtime, and then embed the hmml file... as b64, therefore negating any benefits. | ||