- From: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 23:18:57 +0000
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Philip Taylor wrote: >> (Quoting from the spec:) >>> When a radio group has no checked radio button and more than one of >>> the radio buttons is marked as required, the UA, when alerting the >>> user, should only tell the user that the radio group as a whole is >>> missing a value, not complain about each radio button in turn, even >>> though all of the radio buttons marked with the required attribute >>> would have the valueMissing flag set. >> >> (Suggested spec change: [...]) > > The wording changed quite a bit; is the new wording ok? That sentence appears to have morphed into "User agents may coalesce related constraint violation reports if appropriate (e.g. if multiple radio buttons in a set are marked as required, only one error need be reported)", which sounds reasonable enough. (Perhaps that should say "group" rather than "set" to be more consistent, but I don't think it really matters.) So I believe it's okay and my comments no longer apply. -- Philip Taylor pjt47@cam.ac.uk
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2008 23:19:51 UTC