Document image optimization's fallback to JPEG #74312
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Allow CI Workflow Run
Note: this should only be enabled once the PR is ready to go and can only be enabled by a maintainer |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
Documents the behavior added in #35190 for the Image Optimization API's behavior when the source image is webp or AVIF and the browser does not support the image.
Why?
I want to migrate my project to store our files as AVIF. I was worried by Next.js's documentation suggesting that it would still serve the "original source file" even if the browser does not support AVIF. It wasn't until finding #35190 that I realized it's safe for me to store the image as AVIF.