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: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:04:58 +0000
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6C94356A-0660-4CF0-9403-AAEE247604BE@nomensa.com>
>    In the SC title/normative text you mean? Or in the definition for "animation"?

Given how definitions work (able to replace the usage), I think both:

SC: “Motion animation triggered by user interaction can be disabled, unless the animation is essential to the functionality or the information being conveyed.”

Def: “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.”

However, as a group we need to make our minds up about the intended scope. I’m not vested one way or the other, I just want it to be decided.

The above change covers the original intended scenario (vestibular disorders), if we also want to cover colour and other types of animation (e.g. for some cognitive folk) the definition should be changed to say something like:
“addition of steps between states to create the illusion of movement and/or to draw attention.” With some additional examples.


Received on Tuesday, 16 January 2018 12:05:40 UTC

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