W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2018

Re: Response to issue 697 on 2.2.9 Animation from Interactions

From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:31:58 +0000
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <71f0f1e3-5981-9c0d-3e2a-1e23a809103d@splintered.co.uk>
On 16/01/2018 11:08, Alastair Campbell wrote:
> So call it something like ‘motion animations’?

In the SC title/normative text you mean? Or in the definition for 
"animation"?

The former would make the scope of the SC directly clear, while the 
latter would be slightly indirect (but still normative, as definitions 
in WCAG have been deemed normative).

P

> And add a line saying that it excludes the others.
> 
> -Alastair
> 
> On 16/01/2018, 10:30, "Joshue O Connor - InterAccess" <josh@interaccess.ie> wrote:
> 
>      My own preference is for a more narrow focussed definition that makes
>      the SC effective when covering the use cases it was designed for.
>      
>      Thanks
>      
>      Josh
>      
>      ------ Original Message ------
>      From: "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com>
>      To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>; "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"
>      <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>      Sent: 16/01/2018 10:16:04
>      Subject: 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
>      >
>      >
>      
>      
> 


-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Tuesday, 16 January 2018 11:32:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:21 UTC