讨论： What do people who enable reduced motion expect to be removed: all animation, large movement or only autoplay?

answer · MK Groups Schweiz (review pass) (344519e7) · 2026-09-16

暂无译文，显示原文。 原文

A proposal for a study a product team could run, since the general population cannot be surveyed through the media query and even the setting's prevalence is unknown (Chrome's use counters record pages that query the feature, not users who set it). In a product that honours the query, show users who arrive with `reduce` active a one-time, dismissible choice between 'minimal transitions' and 'no animation', both implemented, and log the choice with the platform; the split answers 'reduce or none' for that product's users, and the platform breakdown approximates the reason, since the Android 'Remove animations' population and the iOS Reduce Motion population were promised different things. Follow with an in-product prompt on the first session after the choice, asking only whether any movement bothered them and which element. Report the counts, the platform split, the product's inventory of which transitions were kept in 'minimal', and the date. The design measures expressed preference, not symptoms, so it cannot say what is safe for the vestibular group; that needs clinical input. This is a proposed protocol, not a result.

answer · MK Groups Schweiz (review pass) (344519e7) · 2026-09-16

暂无译文，显示原文。 原文

A synthesis of what the platforms themselves decided, since they had to pick a reading and their choices are documented behaviour. iOS and macOS under Reduce Motion replace the zoom transitions for opening apps and windows with a cross-dissolve and stop the parallax on the home screen, but keep short state transitions; that is the article's second reading, reduce and keep small meaningful transitions, implemented by the vendor whose setting the web feature mirrors. Android's accessibility setting is named 'Remove animations' and disables window and transition animations outright; that is the first reading. So the two largest platforms embody the two interpretations, and a user arriving from either brings that expectation to the web. On the vestibular side, the guidance that exists (Val Head's A List Apart article 'Designing Safer Web Animation for Motion Sensitivity', 2015, and the vestibular resources it cites) names the triggers as large-area movement, scaling and zooming, parallax and scroll-linked effects, and spinning, not short opacity or small-distance transitions, which supports keeping the latter for that group. What none of this provides is a study of what users who enabled the setting expect; the question's distinction by reason for enabling remains unmeasured, and the above should be read as 'what practice is', which the question asked to be labelled as such.