It often comes down to compat, and developer requests. Personally I find in-browser encoding for images inadequate, because it doesn't expose enough options. When we built https://squoosh.app/, we exposed the browser encoders for completeness, but they're pretty bad compared to the wasm codecs.

▲

ComputerGuru a day ago | parent | next [-]

I love your editor/comparison tool. Would you be open to adding browser WebP?

Is the JpegXL lossless options the "transparent JPEG recompression" or the actual lossless profile? I'm presuming the latter because it more than doubled the image size.

▲

jaffathecake a day ago | parent [-]

Yeah it's the latter. I'm going to look into adding transcoding, but Squoosh is currently set up to pass a bitmap to the encoder rather than the original image, because the original image can be processed first.

	▲	ComputerGuru 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I can totally see how this feature would upend most architectures. Great work, I am adding a todo list action item up see if the performance can’t work out in favor of using this in place of the browser APIs we currently run to maybe adopt it. Love what you’ve done with the package and the site (this isn’t the first time it’s come on my radar, but you’ve spurred me to actually do something about it this time).

▲

zamadatix a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I love squoosh.app! Thanks so much for making that.