Consider the animation that appears when you drag and drop a bunch of files from one folder to another and you can see the files moving from the first folder to the second. Is that an example of any of these: visibility, affordance, mapping, consistency? Why, why not? Thank you in advance.
I'll discuss each term separately:
I haven't heard this term before, I'm guessing it comes from David Hogue? This is his definition:
Good visibility, according to Hogue’s principles, means that obvious prompts and cues are present, which:
- Lead the user through an interaction.
- Guide them through a series of tasks.
- Indicate what possible actions are available to them.
- Communicate the context of the situation.
Out of all of these, the animation meets the last point, as it communicates that the files are being moved, where the files came from and where they're going.
Depends on your definition. Don Norman defines them as "perceivable action possibilities". The animation doesn't meet this definition, as it doesn't communicate what actions you may take.
Depends on what definition you're using. Mapping is often used in the context of making diagrams, which isn't the case here. There's also the case of mental maps, where you try to come close to how a user understands concepts.
You could argue that you're mapping the move action to the physical movement of objects, which is illustrated by this move animation.
This really depends on the context you're designing in. If the move animation is commonly used on the platform, in other projects, or at least within your own project, then it's an example of consistency.