Skip to content

MQ5 User Prefs: prefers-reduced-transparency #1709

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 11, 2017
Merged

MQ5 User Prefs: prefers-reduced-transparency #1709

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
15d8b87
MQ5 User Prefs: prefers-reduced-transparency
cookiecrook Aug 10, 2017
2409176
Review: title change requested by @frivoal
cookiecrook Aug 11, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
34 changes: 34 additions & 0 deletions mediaqueries-5/Overview.bs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -478,6 +478,36 @@ Detecting the desire for less motion on the page: the 'prefers-reduced-motion' f

</dl>

<h3 id="prefers-reduced-transparency">
Detecting the desire to reduce the use of transparent or translucent layering effects on the page: the 'prefers-reduced-transparency' feature</h3>
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you shorten this title a bit? This a bit unwieldy, and does not need to reproduce the whole content of the section. How about:

Detecting the desire for reduced transparency on the page: the 'prefers-reduced-transparency' feature

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Transparency is a boolean concept; translucency and opacity are not. If the feature name contains transparency for the sake of easy vs more correct language, then the docs can easily contain translucent and/or opacity if authors are search the docs for those (more correct) terms.

But - as long as @cookiecrook hadn't had more specifics in mind - skipping the layering effects vs just page 👍

Detecting the desire for reduced transparency or translucency on the page: the 'prefers-reduced-transparency' feature

Copy link
Collaborator

@frivoal frivoal Aug 10, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Transparency is a boolean concept; translucency and opacity are not.

I'm affraid I'll disagree on this one. I check the dictionary, and it gave not hit of this nuance. https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=partially+transparent&tbm=isch gives plenty of relevant results. Apple used this phrasing in their System Preferences to express the same concept. Using the word transparency is fine.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, but clearly many UI effects nowadays combine a certain levels of opacity/transparency with certain levels of translucency (see example graphics on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_and_translucency) and as long as this MQ should detect a combined preference then transparency for the name and translucency as part of the docs seems reasonable. My guess is still that apple picked "transparency" as that is an easy concept to get to every user.

opacity is btw the key word in CSS used to describe (non boolean shades of) transparency of layers, not transparency.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree that the standard English usage of all of these related terms are all roughly equivalent, and all encompass degrees.

For example, I was taught that opaque/translucent/transparent refer to the degree of opacity: something is translucent when light passes thru, but it's not clear enough to actually see details on the far side; something is transparent when you can actually see thru it to at least some degree. (The boundary is obviously very fuzzy, no pun intended, but the categories are clear enough, no pun intended. "Privacy glass" is more on the translucent side, cloudy plastic is translucent, etc. Normal windows are transparent. Rice paper is translucent.)

In other words, the definitions are definitely intertwined and uncertain enough that we can really use any of them here; there's no way to defend any particular definition as Definitely Correct.


<pre class='descdef mq'>
Name: prefers-reduced-transparency
Value: no-preference | reduce
For: @media
Type: discrete
</pre>

The 'prefers-reduced-transparency' media feature is used to detect if the user
has requested the system minimize the amount of transparent or translecent
layering effects it uses.

<dl dfn-type=value dfn-for="@media/prefers-reduced-transparency">
<dt><dfn>no-preference</dfn>
<dd>
Indicates that the user has made no preference known
to the system. This keyword value evaluates as false
in the <a>boolean context</a>.

<dt><dfn>reduce</dfn>
<dd>
Indicates that user has notified the system that they
prefer an interface that minimizes the amount of
transparent or translucent layer effects.

</dl>


<h2 id="changes" class="no-num">
Changes</h2>
<h3 id="changes-2017">
Expand All @@ -493,6 +523,10 @@ The following changes were made to this specification since the

<li>
Add 'prefers-reduced-motion' media feature.

<li>
Add 'prefers-reduced-transparency' media feature.

</ul>


Expand Down