In case you didn't realize, "designed" is a very strong word. JPEG was certainly not designed for the web; the first web browsers didn't support inline images. WebP, despite of its name, is a key frame from VP8 which wasn't not exactly designed for the web; it was the latest iteration of TrueMotion codecs developed by On2 Technologies before its acquisition to Google, and while later codecs were also used in the web, they initially targeted games and later expanded to the general purpose format. AV1 and AVIF is probably the only format that can be possibly designed for the web due to their explicit goals.

And even so, it is utterly unclear to me how lossy image formats can be designed "for the web" in the way you have described. I will probably expect a good progressive decoding support and possibly animation, but that's all. Otherwise it's a good old psychovisual optimization under specific viewing conditions, and it is much debatable which viewing conditions represent the web environment.

> I also still maintain that lossy formats aren't designed to manage users zooming into textures and trying to find out compression artifacts and wavelet caused softening of power lines.

Which is a fair point but WebP at the lower quality does show significant enough artifacts visible without zoom for ordinary displays. Mobiles with higher pixel density in a constrainted form factor do matter, but you can't ignore ordinary displays in your file format solely for that reason.