[Bug 13769] Whitespace-only values should be considered empty in required form fields


Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #16 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-09-30 20:08:28 UTC ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change

Making required="" special-case one of the many invisible characters in Unicode
would lead authors to simply not think about this case at all, which isn't
really an option IMHO.

Only removing invisible characters still doesn't really solve the problem,
which is that for freeform fields there's all kinds of ways of not answering.
Why would we make users use "." instead of " " if they want to work around the
form claiming that a freeform field is required?

In fact, making a freeform field required doesn't make that much sense to start
with. It makes sense for cases that have particular data structure (e.g. types
other than text, or when there's a pattern), but why would you mark a freeform
field as "required" and then disallow " " but not "."?

In the case where you really want to disallow just spaces, but are ok with
letting the user work around this in one of the many other ways one can do so,
the pattern="" attribute already provides a simple way to do so.

If people use that pattern a lot, that would be good evidence that I'm wrong
here, but in the absence of evidence to that effect, I don't think the
arguments presented are compelling enough to justify making the language
somewhat magical here.

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Friday, 30 September 2011 20:08:34 UTC