With regard to "webp" we'd love to see support for it because it REALLY helps lessen load time!, while offering an alternative link if the client's browser doesn't support webp:
<picture>
<source srcset="path/img.webp" type="image/webp">
<source srcset="path/img.png" type="image/png">
<img alt="Logo" src="path/img.png" style="border-width: 0px" height="100" width="351">
</picture>

... And note the use of the height and width data, which Google now requires to meet their definition of "mobile friendly code" instead of previous mobile image parameters WITHOUT height and width info.

Which brings up the question: Is there a way that image sizes can be added to the code when uploading small, large and giant images? So after uploading an image, image code should read something like this:
<img alt="XXXX" src="prodimages/XXXXX.jpg" height="XXX" width="XXX">
(with all of the other id= and class= stuff that gets put in there of course)

integrating these 2 coding protocols will help us ALL with our Load Speed challenges.

Thanks! Just wanted to share our experience with these parameters ....


Tim Gorski

Tim, here is a link to a Google Developers page which discusses [url="https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/design-and-ux/responsive/images"][blue]Web Fundamentals for Images in Responsive Design >>[/blue][/url]

Inspect their raw HTML code and note they do not specify height and width data for images, or where they do it is in the form of "min-width".

Run their page through the Google [url="https://search.google.com/test/rich-results"][blue]Rich Results Test Tool[/blue][/url] and it passes with a clean result, no issues.

Gary
[img]https://itzap.com.au/pics/logo/itzap-website-design-works-mini-logo.png[/img]