2 ms·

I don't think `prefers-reduced-motion` disabling gifs by default is the right approach here. The goal of the tag is to reduce non-essential motion, but gifs may

by jjcm 4y ago

I don't think `prefers-reduced-motion` disabling gifs by default is the right approach here. The goal of the tag is to reduce non-essential motion, but gifs may have essential information on a frame other than the first. There's definitely arguments to be made around whether or not you should have information in a gif, but I see this argument akin to whether or not a page should work without javascript. We've moved to a state on the web where usage is so high we can't really turn back.

lilyball 4y ago
> The goal of the tag is to reduce non-essential motion, but gifs may have essential information on a frame other than the first. This is why I said I wasn't taking a stand on whether the <img> tag should apply this logic natively. It really depends on the content and context of the image. Not doing it natively means most sites won't bother to implement the prefers-reduced-motion, but doing it natively means images with meaningful content buried in the animation would effectively be broken.