Re: Proposal for: Animation from Interactions

+1

Kindest Regards,
Laura

On Jan 16, 2018 4:16 PM, "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone, and especially Patrick and Greg,
>
> The key thing to resolve for this one is whether it applies only to motion
> based animation, or more widely.
>
> Just before Christmas, the SC was widened to include more, this was
> (AFAICT) mostly from Greg, and triggered from a word in the understanding
> doc [2], "distraction". The history of the file is all there [3], I think
> it's an unfortunate impression as it's one mention in a short doc.
>
> For me, the balance is that whilst there might be some benefit to widening
> the SC, it also removes all animation (from interactions), rather than the
> ones we know can impact people. (I'm sure some animations don't bother
> people with cognitive issues, but the point would be that we don't know
> where that line is.)
>
> Therefore I propose to accept the changes from issue 697, so the updated
> text would refer to 'motion animations':
> "Motion animation triggered by user interaction can be disabled, unless
> the animation is essential to the functionality or the information being
> conveyed."
>
> Which are defined as:
> "Motion animation: addition of steps between states to create the illusion
> of movement and/or to give a sense of movement.
> For example, an element which moves into place or changes size while
> appearing is considered to be animated. An element which appears instantly
> in one frame is not using animation. Motion animation does not include
> changes of color, blurring or opacity.”
>
> Hopefully that can be agreed asap? Seems a shame to loose for this reason.
>
> -Alastair
>
> 1] https://www.w3.org/2017/12/21-ag-minutes.html#item05
> 2] https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/21/animation-
> from-interactions.html
> 3] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/commits/animation-from-
> interactions/understanding/21/animation-from-interactions.html
>
>
>