Re: Response to issue 697 on 2.2.9 Animation from Interactions

We started with motion & scaling animations, that got changed to the general animations (intentionally, to cover more aspects):
https://www.w3.org/2017/12/21-ag-minutes.html#item05 

Accepted Jan 3rd:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2018JanMar/0029.html 

I’d be happy emphasising motion-type animations in the definition without excluding others, but it seems the choice is either:
- Undo the previous decision, or
- Widen the explicit scope of the definition.

-Alastair


On 16/01/2018, 08:06, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

    In that case:
    
    -1 this definition only mentions movement/size, whereas animation as a 
    concept (particularly in web design/development) cover a wide range of 
    changes (including "color animation", "opacity animation", etc). Either 
    the definition needs to make it clear that it's taking a subset and only 
    considering movement/size, OR the definition needs to encompass all 
    forms of animation and the SC needs to then be scoped to only cover 
    "motion animation" or similar.
    
    P
 

Received on Tuesday, 16 January 2018 10:16:34 UTC