[mpeg]

I don't understand the advantage of this vs an html file with embedded images, except the latter would work with no runtime.

[yeargun]

If you plan to serve your image with a self contained, single pack.

Then with html + rasterized images (.jpeg/.png, ..) you would have to pay extra size overhead caused by base64.

With hmml, you dont

[mpeg]

I get that, but the drawbacks outweigh the benefits imho and the b64 overhead is not solved, just deferred.

Say I want to distribute an hmml file as a single file, I'd have to create an html with the embedded js runtime, and then embed the hmml file... as b64, therefore negating any benefits.