Free webp to jpg
Image MIME Reference
JXL

JPEG XL

image/jxl
VS

North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax

image/naplps
NAPLPS

A complete technical comparison of JPEG XL and North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

JXL wins on browser support

Feature Support

Feature JXL NAPLPS
Transparency (Alpha) Yes ✕ No
Animation Support Yes Yes
Progressive Loading Yes Yes
HDR Support Yes ✕ No
EXIF Metadata Yes ✕ No
ICC Color Profile Yes ✕ No
JPEG XL
image/jxl
Extension
.jxl
Container ISOBMFF / JPEG XL Codestream
Compression Lossy (VarDCT) / Lossless (Modular)
Algorithm
VarDCT (Variable block-size DCT)Modular (Predictive coding for lossless)
Color Depth 8-bit, 10-bit, 12-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit (Float)
Developed by Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG)
Released 2021
Magic Bytes
FF 0A (Codestream) / 00 00 00 0C 4A 58 4C 20 0D 0A 87 0A (Container)
Full JXL reference →
North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax
image/naplps
Extension
.nap.naplps
Container NAPLPS Byte Stream
Compression Uncompressed (Tokenized ASCII Commands)
Algorithm
None (Coordinate encoding)
Color Depth 16-color palette (Indexed from larger color spaces)
Developed by ANSI / CSA (Based on Canadian CRC's Telidon)
Released 1983
Magic Bytes
1B (Variable / ESC sequences)
Full NAPLPS reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser JXL NAPLPS
Chrome Chrome
Firefox Firefox
Safari Safari
✓ 17+
Edge Edge
IE IE (Legacy)
JXL

JXL Strengths

  • Capable of losslessly recompressing legacy JPEG files, saving ~20% space while retaining perfect byte-for-byte restorability
  • Highly superior progressive decoding (Saliency-driven), allowing recognizable images to load extremely fast on slow connections
  • Outperforms WebP and competes favorably with AVIF, especially at high-fidelity settings and for complex textures/photography
  • Royalty-free with an open-source reference implementation (libjxl)
Limitations
  • Google's removal of JXL support from Chrome severely hindered its adoption as a universal web standard
  • Lack of hardware decoding chips compared to video-derived codecs like AVIF (AV1)
  • File parsing logic is complex due to the split between raw codestreams and ISOBMFF containers
NAPLPS

NAPLPS Strengths

  • Extremely bandwidth-efficient, enabling colorful graphical interfaces over early 300 baud dial-up connections
  • Resolution-independent vector scaling allowed the exact same file to be displayed accurately on varied early PC monitors and television sets
Limitations
  • Completely obsolete and unsupported by modern web technologies
  • Relies heavily on stateful parsing and terminal emulators rather than straightforward file decoding
  • Easily misidentified by MIME sniffers as plain text or generic binary streams due to the lack of a standardized file header

When to choose which format

JXL
Use JXL when…
  • High-End Web Delivery (via Safari/Polyfills)
  • HDR Photography
  • Legacy JPEG Archiving
  • Digital Art & Image Storage
NAPLPS
Use NAPLPS when…
  • 1980s Videotex Services
  • Prodigy Online Service Graphics
  • Historical BBS Terminal Graphics
  • Legacy Teletext Broadcasts
Share this comparison