Browsers already fully support 4:4:4 AVIF and are not going to regress on this, as it would be a huge compat issue.

It isn't clear whether AVIF hardware decoding will ever be an advantage, but for video formats, Firefox and Chrome already pick between hardware and software decoders to ensure the content plays correctly. Safari is much flakier here, but again, for images, they're not going to regress on 4:4:4 AVIF support.

▲

hirako2000 an hour ago | parent [-]

Lossless AVIF encoding is inferior to JXL though, the article oddly dismisses lossless as a valid case for the web so it ignores the core argument that lossless is critical for some type of content.

I find the hardware support argument far more compelling that diminishing the value of lossless publishing.

	▲	jaffathecake an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I think the need for lossless images within a web page is extremely niche. I've used them before when comparing image codecs, but that's about it. In cases where you need lossless, WebP is there. It's close to JPEG XL's performance, sometimes beats it, and is orders of magnitude faster to decode.