Blocking animations?

[meloukhia]

Animations and flashing things (including animated user icons and mood icons) basically break my brain and they keep showing up on my reading list, much to my dismay. I'm wonder if it's possible to add an option to the user settings to block all animations on the site (in my innocence about web development, I have no idea how difficult this would be)? I know this is an accessibility need for other people as well. 

Comments

[aithine]

I know that about DW, thanks. :) And yeah, I probably could've phrased it better. But there comes a point where you're talking about controlling content ("and they keep showing up on my reading list"), which is up to user, not the site.

I have issues with flashing graphics and Flash animation and horrible site design changes; I take control of all of those through using browsers that allow me to set how that sort of content is displayed. I was pointing out NS because it sounded to me like s/he might not have heard of it, if they're having the issues described above. *shrug*

[trouble]

That's great. Some of us don't use browsers that do that, or we surf the site at different locations and cannot have our browsers set up that way at every location, such as public access terminals or work terminals that don't allow one to download software onto them.

Also, do you consider it controlling other people's content that I have my default settings to not display videos? Because that's in the code right now, I checked a button for that. I could also check a button to not view images at all, to not honour cut-tags, and to not view other people's layouts ever. Do you consider all that controlling other people's content?

Honestly, I suspect, as I said, that this isn't something the site can do, but you're coming across as very rude and actively hostile to someone asking if the site can implement the same sort of thing that they do right now for videos and images but for animated gifs. meloukhia isn't asking for people to not do animated gifs anymore than I'm asking them to not put up videos.

[foxfirefey]

Just as a tangent to the discussion, not a point--I do recommend Portable Firefox for situations where you can't install software but do need some specialized browsing experiences.

[jadelennox]

Well, we let the site override posting user styles. Why not override posting user animated mood themes and userpics?

[aithine]

Yep, it would be easy enough, I think, to extend the code that blocks stuff like embedded YouTube videos to suppress all userpics and/or all mood themes. But controlling just animated gifs, for example, would be much more server intensive. The GIF specification does include info on whether or not a GIF is animated, but every file would have to be checked every single time before they were displayed. So after some more pondering, yeah. *g*

[jadelennox]

yeah, after I thought that through, I realized that turning off animated gifs wouldn't work. But turning off all userpics without turning off all images could be a feature. Actually it would be a nice alternative to what LJ dealt with back in the day as Boobgate, or what ever it ended up being called. Worried about NSFW user icons? Just turn them all off.

It's easy enough to override all the mood themes to simple smileys with our current configuration, so that's something.

[aithine]

Yeah, that would be a nice option. I was also thinking it would be nice to have the ability to override by user--to be able to set an icon out of that user's icons that you've chosen as their default to display on your reading page (or pages where, say, light layout is specified) instead of whatever icon they've specified for that post. (If that makes sense. Brain's tired.)

[jadelennox]

that makes perfect sense! I've wondered about that with my own icons, actually. Sometimes I switch icons halfway through commenting on a post, and I wonder if that causes cognitive issues for people who are associating me with one image. I feel like that could actually be a real cognitive gain, although I admit I am making that one up and have never actually seen somebody with a cognitive disability complain about people switching icons.

[jumpuphigh]

I associate people that I don't know that well with their default icons. Mid-conversation or people that I know well can switch icons at will without bothering me.

[mercredigirl]

My only issue (but obviously not speaking for everyone) are icons that turn out to be unintentional and irrational triggers. :/

[codeman38]

...Actually, that just gave me an idea. Since I'm guessing the icons are pulled from some sort of database... add a column indicating whether the image is animated, that's set at upload time.

[aithine]

Yep, that could solve the problem for icons--they would only have to be checked when uploaded or changed, rather than every single time. Could probably do the same thing for mood icons, assuming (again *g*) that the info where the mood theme pictures is stored in the db.

[aithine]

Also, I ♥ your grammar geek icon. *g*

[lilacsigil]

That was a weirdly patronising response when DW is great for controlling other aspects of our content that we see. I control my internet experience via Firefox, but it also means that I never, ever use a computer other than my home or work ones. It would be great to know I could go somewhere and check out my DW or answer my comments on a public terminal.

[automaticdoor]

You know, I think that was a very patronizing response too, and it almost completely ignores the OP's problem. Ou is looking for constructive ideas from our fellow members and feedback from DW in particular, and you specifically said that it's not DW's responsibility. Well, this community is moderated by DW heads. I think they consider it their responsibility to make sure the site works for every user as best as they can.