Append ".webp" to [filename] + [extension] instead of replacing extension
TheodorTomas opened this issue · comments
Do you want to request a feature or report a bug?
Possible bug/Feature idea
What is the current behaviour?
Replaces extension to "webp" format.
"checkmark-icon.jpg" => "checkmark-icon.webp"
What is the expected behaviour?
Append ".webp" to [filename] + [extension] to ensure uniqueness. This would prevent files with same name but different extensions overwriting the output of the .webp conversion output.
Example:
"checkmark-icon.jpg" => "checkmark-icon.jpg.webp"
"checkmark-icon.png" => "checkmark-icon.png.webp"
Hey,
I get your point but I don't think this is an issue that should be handled by the plugin. I mean, why would you have the same image in different formats? In what use case would you use both?
I know this is old, but just a quick comment, you may want to have a fallback jpg for older browsers, but just the extension change should be fine.
Yes indeed, But I think he was referring to having an image in more than one format, for example: jpeg
and png
. I don't see a usecase for that to be honest.
Usually you'd have just one well-supported format as a fallback, and then a newer format like webp
or the even newer avif
.
Hey,
My example is this. I have a folder with two images containing the same name for two different extensions, lets say profile.jpg
and profile.png
, and I would like to convert them both to .webp
format. This extension will then not work correctly since it will discard the original extension information when converting to webp
.
i.e. profile.jpg
and profile.png
will both result in creating profile.webp
. This is quite inconvenient and IMO is something the plugin should guard against. But I found a workaround by having webpack add the extension type to the filename before formatting to webp
so it is not something I require anymore.
Hope that explains my situation a little bit better.
Yes indeed, But I think he was referring to having an image in more than one format, for example:
jpeg
andpng
. I don't see a usecase for that to be honest.Usually you'd have just one well-supported format as a fallback, and then a newer format like
webp
or the even neweravif
.
Yeah I agree, one fallback sounds reasonable.