[Feature Request] Enable JXL support OOTB

[louie-github]

As mentioned in the Release notes, JPEG XL (JXL) support was added via mozconfig and --enable-jxl. However, it isn't enabled out-of-the-box as of release v.110.0a1:

Going to https://jpegxl.info/test-page shows:

As you can see, the JXL flag is not enabled by default:

Enabling the flag manually allows the JXL images to appear as normal. I think you need to change the user preference by default as is done by Waterfox (see 000-waterfox.js)

On a related note, I think you might also want to disable the Nightly check for JXL support as done in this Waterfox PR, in case in the future you switch to building on Stable. I'd open a PR myself, but I'm not sure how to integrate it within your repository.

Thank you!

[gianni-rosato]

+1 for this! It's a delight to be able to use Thorium to view JXL images on the web, it'd be great to do the same with Mercury!

[Alex313031]

@louie-github @gianni-rosato Good idea. I will do this. Im also going to be building mercury to more stable versions, so I will disable the check.

[BlueSwordM]

Yes, thank you!
Please merge all the patches, and the latest ones at that please :)

[goodusername123]

I would like to say that the default JXL support in firefox is very basic and is lacking support for transparency, animation, progressive decoding and color profiles however a pull request that was merged into waterfox adds support for all of these features and it should probably be merged into mercury as well and it can be found here BrowserWorks/Waterfox#2938
(patch file for just the improved JXL support is here)

[gz83]

I would like to say that the default JXL support in firefox is very basic and is lacking support for transparency, animation, progressive decoding and color profiles however a pull request that was merged into waterfox adds support for all of these features and it should probably be merged into mercury as well and it can be found here WaterfoxCo/Waterfox#2938 (patch file for just the improved JXL support is here)

@goodusername123

I have a better idea for this patch: why not just implement it upstream? Implementing it upstream will directly benefit the downstream derivatives. lol

[gianni-rosato]

I think Mozilla refuses to because of their """neutral""" stance on JPEG-XL

[Alex313031]

@louie-github @gianni-rosato @BlueSwordM Done! > bd62664 and c87b027

[gianni-rosato]

You are a super developer! Your efforts are appreciated!!

[Alex313031]

@gz83 @BlueSwordM @louie-github @gianni-rosato New release, now with a windows installer. JXL enabled OOTB > https://github.com/Alex313031/Mercury/releases/tag/v.111.0.2

[goodusername123]

I would like to say that the default JXL support in firefox is very basic and is lacking support for transparency, animation, progressive decoding and color profiles however a pull request that was merged into waterfox adds support for all of these features and it should probably be merged into mercury as well and it can be found here WaterfoxCo/Waterfox#2938 (patch file for just the improved JXL support is here)

@goodusername123

I have a better idea for this patch: why not just implement it upstream? Implementing it upstream will directly benefit the downstream derivatives. lol

@gz83 Mozilla refuses to review or implement these patches and they have been sitting around for over 2 years ignored and with the recent announcement that Mozilla is "neutral" on JPEG-XL it's very unlikely they will implement improved JPEG-XL support into the core of Firefox.

[gz83]

I would like to say that the default JXL support in firefox is very basic and is lacking support for transparency, animation, progressive decoding and color profiles however a pull request that was merged into waterfox adds support for all of these features and it should probably be merged into mercury as well and it can be found here WaterfoxCo/Waterfox#2938 (patch file for just the improved JXL support is here)

@goodusername123
I have a better idea for this patch: why not just implement it upstream? Implementing it upstream will directly benefit the downstream derivatives. lol

@gz83 Mozilla refuses to review or implement these patches and they have been sitting around for over 2 years ignored and with the recent announcement that Mozilla is "neutral" on JPEG-XL it's very unlikely they will implement improved JPEG-XL support into the core of Firefox.

I would like to say that the default JXL support in firefox is very basic and is lacking support for transparency, animation, progressive decoding and color profiles however a pull request that was merged into waterfox adds support for all of these features and it should probably be merged into mercury as well and it can be found here WaterfoxCo/Waterfox#2938 (patch file for just the improved JXL support is here)

@goodusername123
I have a better idea for this patch: why not just implement it upstream? Implementing it upstream will directly benefit the downstream derivatives. lol

@gz83 Mozilla refuses to review or implement these patches and they have been sitting around for over 2 years ignored and with the recent announcement that Mozilla is "neutral" on JPEG-XL it's very unlikely they will implement improved JPEG-XL support into the core of Firefox.

@goodusername123

Has the recently released Mercury met your needs? If it hasn't met it, what haven't we done?

[goodusername123]

I would like to say that the default JXL support in firefox is very basic and is lacking support for transparency, animation, progressive decoding and color profiles however a pull request that was merged into waterfox adds support for all of these features and it should probably be merged into mercury as well and it can be found here WaterfoxCo/Waterfox#2938 (patch file for just the improved JXL support is here)

@goodusername123
I have a better idea for this patch: why not just implement it upstream? Implementing it upstream will directly benefit the downstream derivatives. lol

@gz83 Mozilla refuses to review or implement these patches and they have been sitting around for over 2 years ignored and with the recent announcement that Mozilla is "neutral" on JPEG-XL it's very unlikely they will implement improved JPEG-XL support into the core of Firefox.

I would like to say that the default JXL support in firefox is very basic and is lacking support for transparency, animation, progressive decoding and color profiles however a pull request that was merged into waterfox adds support for all of these features and it should probably be merged into mercury as well and it can be found here WaterfoxCo/Waterfox#2938 (patch file for just the improved JXL support is here)

@goodusername123
I have a better idea for this patch: why not just implement it upstream? Implementing it upstream will directly benefit the downstream derivatives. lol

@gz83 Mozilla refuses to review or implement these patches and they have been sitting around for over 2 years ignored and with the recent announcement that Mozilla is "neutral" on JPEG-XL it's very unlikely they will implement improved JPEG-XL support into the core of Firefox.

@goodusername123

Has the recently released Mercury met your needs? If it hasn't met it, what haven't we done?

@gz83

The current version of Mercury has issues with JXL images it's lacking proper support for transparency and color profiles and lacking any support for animation or progressive decoding, for example pages such as this one will have it's images only load in once they are 100% downloaded as opposed to being visible when only around 10% or 16% of them are done downloading which is really noticeable on slower network connections, the issues with animations and transparency can be seen on the JXL test page here. all of these issues can be solved if the patch(es) I sent are merged into Mercury, they don't originate from the Waterfox project however the patch from Waterfox has all the code changes available as a single patch along with a single line changed to match up with more recent changes in the Firefox codebase.