1798659 - Reduce Motion does not work as expected when enabled on blogtechtips.com

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 1753565

(Firefox :: Disability Access, defect, P3)

Description

[Raul Bucata]

Environment:
Operating System: Mac OSX 10.15.6
Operating System: Ubuntu 20.4 LTS x64
Firefox version: Firefox 106.0.3

Preconditions:
Reduce Motion enabled from the device.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Navigate to: https://www.blogtechtips.com/2019/01/02/how-to-safely-eject-flash-drive-from-your-android-phone/
2. Hit page Down. If necessary hit it 2x.

Expected Behavior:
Simple Page Down, in light of Reduce Motion (Reduce Motion works on page)

Actual Behavior:
Animated smooth scrolling, motion sickness, nausea, migraine.

Notes:
Originally reported here: https://github.com/webcompat/web-bugs/issues/113300

Comment 1

[Eitan Isaacson [:eeejay]]

Hard to fully understand what is happening, but I think the JS is consuming page up/down and doing its own smooth scroll routine.

The intent of the reduced motion media query is to allow web authors to choose alternative presentations for motion rich layouts. Outside of the browser UI itself (where we should tweak our UI in that case), we don't override any styles or change how JS scroll functionality works.

Going to mark this as access-s3, but I recommend the module owners either close this bug as won't fix, or redirect the reporter to spec work where enforced reduce motion is discussed (I have no idea where that would be).

Comment 2

[Morgan Reschenberg [:morgan]]

I took a look through the styling on the given website and didn't see any instances of the prefers-reduced-motion media query.
In order for Firefox to disable motion, web authors must indicate where motion occurs and provide alternate behaviour (explicitly) via that media query.

It seems the author of the original issue on github is looking for a browser setting that disables all motion, regardless of author styling.
We have a bug open for that already, so I'll dupe this there.
Please reopen if you believe this is incorrect.

Comment 3

[Morgan Reschenberg [:morgan]]

oops hi eitan :)

Comment 5

[Eitan Isaacson [:eeejay]]

Hi. Much better response.

Comment 6

[Hiroyuki Ikezoe (:hiro)]

So for scroll operations, bug 1753565 is more reasonable as a dup?

Comment 7

[Hiroyuki Ikezoe (:hiro)]

Changing the duplicate bug number to bug 1753565 from bug 1725474 since bug 1725474 is related to CSS animations/transitions, bug 1753565 is for scrolling.