- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 04:28:26 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
@inoas
I think there is no advantage to having
`motion-preference: no-preference | reduced | increased`
instead of
`prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference | reduced`
`prefers-increased-motion: no-preference | increased`
In usage, you need to write either:
`@ media (motion-preference: reduced) {}`
or
`@ media (prefers-reduced-motion) {}`
and the following is useless:
`@ media (motion-preference) {}`
`prefers-reduced-motion: no-pref | reduce` is extensible, but only
towards things that go in the same direction. e.g:
`prefers-reduced-motion: no-pref | reduce | reduce-motion-sickness |
reduce-vibrations | reduce-rotations`
You can be specific as to the kind of motion you want to reduce, but
you can also use it as a blunt tool, in a boolean context without
specifying which kind of motion you care to reduce, and its still
works.
Or, turning the argument around: because authors will use things in a
boolean context if we make it possible, we should either not make it
possible, or make sure that any value added later is compatible the
original semantics. I think you're arguing for the former. I think it
is possible, but does not bring any improvement over doing it as
separate queries, and takes away the possibility of having multiple
refinements expressed via boolean semantics.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal
Please view or discuss this issue at
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/442#issuecomment-266637739
using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2016 04:28:32 UTC