Reputation from Everade - Page 5

Everade got a reaction from olavrb in We need webp NOW December 29, 2022

Why are invisioncommunity devs so blind for webp?

It's not like it requires any other extra work, since the compression of webp is already existant by nature.
Simply allowing webp by default shouldn't be the biggest deal, or is it?
It's already widely accepted by all major browsers, so there's no excuse on that anymore, especially not since you dropped IE support yourselfs.
But still, every request and any conversation about webp have either been put down, or ignored.

Could we please get an explanation why you're so anti-fast-web?
I'm honestly wondering why is that.

I'm also wondering if the spacer.png image load implementation is still best practice either.
Wouldn't it make more sense to add native lazy loading instead?
Really keen to live up to todays SEO standards and performance requirements.

Everade got a reaction from ZLTRGO in We need webp NOW August 6, 2021

Why are invisioncommunity devs so blind for webp?

It's not like it requires any other extra work, since the compression of webp is already existant by nature.
Simply allowing webp by default shouldn't be the biggest deal, or is it?
It's already widely accepted by all major browsers, so there's no excuse on that anymore, especially not since you dropped IE support yourselfs.
But still, every request and any conversation about webp have either been put down, or ignored.

Could we please get an explanation why you're so anti-fast-web?
I'm honestly wondering why is that.

I'm also wondering if the spacer.png image load implementation is still best practice either.
Wouldn't it make more sense to add native lazy loading instead?
Really keen to live up to todays SEO standards and performance requirements.

Everade got a reaction from sobrenome in We need webp NOW October 5, 2020

Thanks for hearing me out, appreciate it.

Hope next to webp ,both webm +mp4 is being considered for "image" uploads in form of faking GIFs as well!
Please note that:
Twitter and Co. are faking GIFs as looping MP4 or WEBP videos since quite a while.
Video format compressions are simply superior in any way. And a user can't tell the difference.
Here's an example of a twitter post which has been uploaded as a GIF and shows as such in the bottom left corner.

And here's the actual source as a mp4:
https://video.twimg.com/tweet_video/EjB_QLaXYAEvrOB.mp4

If a webp or mp4 video is being uploaded within your image upload sections.
You could simply detect the file format and then use the looping video tag accordingly:

<video autoplay loop muted playsinline> <source src="fakegif.webm" type="video/webm"> <source src="fakegif.mp4" type="video/mp4"> </video>
Just like the <picture> tag you've mentioned, it offers fallback options if needed.
Another option would be to convert gifs into webm and so forth...

Hope it helps 😉

Everade reacted to bfarber in We need webp NOW September 28, 2020

It is recommended to output webp files in a <picture> tag instead of an <img> tag, which supports specifying multiple versions. That's something we'd have to take into account.
Also, ios14 added support apparently: https://css-tricks.com/webp-image-support-coming-to-ios-14/
I found that we have an open internal suggestion discussing this already so I've updated it. Thanks!

Everade got a reaction from Linux-Is-Best in We need webp NOW February 19, 2021

1.) Display webp as image instead of attachment (handle them just like all other image types)
2.) Allow webp as image upload option in all areas (Profile Picture, Cover Photo, Forum Icon, Grid Card Image, Pages when posting content and anywhere else that i've missed)

Repeat the steps for .WEBM (would be lovely since video compression is in most cases superior to animated images such as GIF and WEBP)
Would be really great to be able to be able to upload video format types in all the mentioned areas (Profile Pictures, Cover Photo, but especialy Pages)

3.) Add an option to swap all png images (profile content and/or uploads and forum core pictures) to webp instead with a conversion job that processes all images. (That's the bigger work i guess, but would be amazing to have.)
This would ultimately reduce the data usage by tremendous bounds, save bandwith and improve performance.

Everade got a reaction from Linux-Is-Best in We need webp NOW March 20, 2021

Why are invisioncommunity devs so blind for webp?

It's not like it requires any other extra work, since the compression of webp is already existant by nature.
Simply allowing webp by default shouldn't be the biggest deal, or is it?
It's already widely accepted by all major browsers, so there's no excuse on that anymore, especially not since you dropped IE support yourselfs.
But still, every request and any conversation about webp have either been put down, or ignored.

Could we please get an explanation why you're so anti-fast-web?
I'm honestly wondering why is that.

I'm also wondering if the spacer.png image load implementation is still best practice either.
Wouldn't it make more sense to add native lazy loading instead?
Really keen to live up to todays SEO standards and performance requirements.

Everade got a reaction from Silnei L Andrade in We need webp NOW February 9, 2021

Why are invisioncommunity devs so blind for webp?

It's not like it requires any other extra work, since the compression of webp is already existant by nature.
Simply allowing webp by default shouldn't be the biggest deal, or is it?
It's already widely accepted by all major browsers, so there's no excuse on that anymore, especially not since you dropped IE support yourselfs.
But still, every request and any conversation about webp have either been put down, or ignored.

Could we please get an explanation why you're so anti-fast-web?
I'm honestly wondering why is that.

I'm also wondering if the spacer.png image load implementation is still best practice either.
Wouldn't it make more sense to add native lazy loading instead?
Really keen to live up to todays SEO standards and performance requirements.