Learn to use the element and you can stop caring about what petty squabbles browser vendors have around which image formats they choose to support. It's in all the browsers (except IE..), it handles image fallbacks really nicely, and every site should use it where they have an right now.
> you can stop caring about what petty squabbles browser vendors have around which image formats they choose to support.
I think you misunderstand what the picture element does. Yes, you can put a JXL image into a picture tag, but Chrome still won't render it. You'd still need a backup (lower quality) JPG.
You still have to worry about what image formats the vendors support, and now you have the added burden of making sure you have backups for all your images.
Yeah, uploading six versions of every image doesn't intersect with my definition of not caring.
Yeah, uploading six versions of every image doesn't intersect with my definition of not caring.
What I meant was that you only need to care about what image formats you want to support. You don't need to care about what image formats browser vendors support.
Except that you're totally wrong. If you care about JXL, and only want to support JXL, and you put a JXL in your picture tag, then the browser still won't render it, even if you use a picture tag.
Is this true if you provide a polyfill? Have you tried it and it failed? (Serious question.)