[wp-trac] [WordPress Trac] #55443: Create WebP sub-sizes and use for output

[WordPress Trac]

#55443: Create WebP sub-sizes and use for output
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
 Reporter:  adamsilverstein                      |       Owner:
                                                 |  adamsilverstein
     Type:  enhancement                          |      Status:  assigned
 Priority:  normal                               |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  Media                                |     Version:  6.0
 Severity:  normal                               |  Resolution:
 Keywords:  has-unit-tests needs-dev-note        |     Focuses:
  needs-docs needs-user-docs 2nd-opinion needs-  |  performance
  testing changes-requested                      |
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------

Comment (by jb510):

 TY @flixos90 for that summary. I agree some opinions are getting repeated
 based on older proposals, so the summary is helpful.

 If I may, these are questions I haven't seen answered based on the latest
 proposal (WebP only).

 Q1) What happens on a site with 100GB of existing images when thumbnails
 are regenerated (wp media regenerate, by a plugin, or by woo-commerce)?
 If this doesn't "blow up large sites" I'll begrudgingly drop my constant
 pleas for an option.

 Q2) Is anything being done to where WebP would actually benefit existing
 content (ie. old posts/pages written with the classic editor)?

 Q3) How are the < 2% of browsers that don't support WebP going to be
 addressed (again, that's predominantly old iOS devices)


 Why I think these questions matter.

 If the answer to 1 is that it is going to generate WebP images, than we
 still have a problem with increasing file storage unexpectedly on existing
 large sites that we still need to clearly address, and if not with an opt-
 in, then how?  My only suggestion here would be to use NOT generate WebP
 sidecars for existing images by default nor when media regenerate is run
 unless a parameter is passed. Instead pass in an opt-in style parameter to
 force WebP generation for existing images, something like `wp media
 regenerate --webp-existing`. This becomes complicated in terms of code but
 maybe the image meta helps differentiate.

 If the answer to 2 is no, there is no benefit to old content, then again,
 the benefits are being for existing sites are grossly overestimated.  That
 doesn't mean we should do WebP, just we should better consider the
 cost/benefit of this affecting existing images and/or consider how we
 could replace those hard-coded images with WebP versions.  And just to be
 clear, I totally think that becomes plugin territory.  Someone can write a
 plugin that 1) generate WebP sidecar files for existing image AND does the
 search and replace on existing content to replace hard-coded jpegs with
 WebP.  But without that S&R we're burdening millions of sites with WebPs
 for old images that will never be used.

 And 3, it's just unclear what is the plan to address that 2% at this
 point.  I'm not terribly concerned about it, just want to hear a plan
 articulated so debates around it can stop.

 And just to be clear. I do think we've all together made tremendous
 progress in improving how this is going to be implemented in the last few
 weeks, so thank you all for that.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/55443#comment:174>
WordPress Trac <https://core.trac.wordpress.org/>
WordPress publishing platform