Reduced motion: a practical guide

It is rarely the thing that gets a project approved, and often the thing that decides how it goes. This guide covers what reduced motion actually involves, where it usually goes wrong, and how to tell whether yours is in reasonable shape.

Accessibility work almost always improves the experience for people who have no impairment at all. Nothing below assumes a large team or a large budget — most of it is a decision somebody has to make and then write down.

Why this earns attention

Some people get genuinely ill from parallax and large movement. Small and consistent beats large and occasional here. It rarely shows up as a line item, which is exactly why it slips.

For most businesses the question is not whether this matters but how much of it is worth doing right now. That depends on what you are trying to achieve in the next few months, not on best practice in the abstract. In practice this is a scheduling problem more than a technical one.

How to approach it

The operating system already tells you their preference. This is the sort of thing that compounds, quietly, in both directions. Budget a little time for it every quarter and it never becomes a project of its own.

The cost of retrofitting accessibility is several times the cost of building it in. The version that works in practice is usually less elaborate than the version described in the guides.

Honouring it takes one media query. There is a version of this that is over-engineered, and it is worth avoiding. The failure mode is not doing it wrong, it is doing it once and assuming it stays done.

A working checklist

If you want a quick read on where you stand, work through this. Anything you cannot answer confidently is where to start.

• Some people get genuinely ill from parallax and large movement
• The operating system already tells you their preference
• Honouring it takes one media query
• Someone is named as the owner, not just assumed to be
• There is a date in the calendar to review it again
• The decision and the reasoning behind it are written down somewhere findable
• You could explain the current setup to a new hire in five minutes

The mistakes we see most

The most common failure is not doing this badly. It is doing it once, during a launch, and never revisiting it. Circumstances move, the setup does not, and the gap widens quietly until something breaks or somebody notices the numbers.

• It was configured during a launch and has not been touched since
• Different people in the business believe different things are true about it
• There is no way to tell whether the last change helped or hurt
• The only person who understands it has left, or is about to

Most of it is correctness rather than charity: use the right element and much of it happens automatically. It is worth being explicit about, because assumptions differ quietly.

How we approach it

On our projects this gets handled during the build rather than added afterwards, because retrofitting it costs several times more than including it. We write down what was decided and why, so the next person to touch it is not guessing.

If you are working with someone else, the questions worth asking are simple: who owns this, how will we know it is working, and what happens when it needs to change?

Making it stick

Pick the single item from the checklist above that would cause the most trouble if it turned out to be wrong. Fix that one, confirm it worked, then move on. Most of the value here comes from doing the first two things, not all of them.