W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > December 2016

Re: [csswg-drafts] [mediaqueries] Media Feature: "reduce motion" user setting

From: James Craig via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 21:17:40 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-266125812-1481318256-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Current diff is:
prefers-reduced-motion: default | reduce

@frivoal wants to combine what I'm referring to as "preference 
features" (author optional; does not trigger a UI change by default) 
with "forced features" (which allows an author to respond to a change 
that has already been made) like all other standard media features. 
It's a great idea conceptually, but I see value in keeping these 
separate because implementation of forced features related to user 
prefs varies greatly across platforms. For example, native "forced" 
contrast settings on Windows, Android, iOS and macOS seem 
irreconcilable. Adding a preference-based value and all the variant 
forced values into a single media feature seems like an impossible 
task. Furthermore a prefixed ("prefers-") or suffixed ("-preference") 
naming convention could more clearly convey which features require 
author adoption. I don't think any of the other name proposals 
(including @inoas's last one in the previous comment) work because of 
this mixing. 

I'm feeling more and more strongly that standard media features should
 convey "UI matches this state. Author MAY adapt." (monochrome, etc.) 
and the preference media features should convey "User wants author to 
match this preference. Author SHOULD adapt." (prefers-reduced-motion 
or motion-pref[erence], etc.)

@inoas doesn't like that the current name ("prefers" and "reduced") 
implies a value. I think it's useful for the boolean context but 
agreed I could live without a boolean context:
motion-pref: no-preference | reduce /* or reduce-all */
motion-preference: no-preference | reduce /* or reduce-all */ 
/* syntax is open to future granularity: reduce-rotation, 
reduce-scaling, etc. */

My impression is that @inoas and @frivoal are warming to this last 
suggestion, but have not committed. @tabatkins doesn't like the longer
 suffix but has not commented in a while. 

So @tabatkins, @frivoal, and @inoas, could you live with the last 
suggestion, without attempting to mix the forced settings and 
preference setting into a single media feature?

Before you answer, remember that [W3C Staff is #thankful for those who
 have let their own great design be replaced by the eventual 
consensus](https://twitter.com/w3c/status/801823134378770432) ;-)

GitHub Notification of comment by cookiecrook
Please view or discuss this issue at 
using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 9 December 2016 21:17:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 19 October 2021 01:30:27 UTC