- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 02:33:38 +0000 (UTC)
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Matthew Raymond wrote: > > I oppose the idea of having no radio buttons in a radio group > initially selected. Without some sort of default, there's no way to > return to the initial state once you've clicked on an option. To allow > unselected behavior is the functional equivalent of having a default > option that disappears once you select something other than the default. > It also creates the following two problems: > > 1) If you have to worry about options not being selected, you have to > test to see if nothing was selected. In a strict security sense, the > server should be checking anyway, but in practice this can trip up a lot > of webmasters. > > 2) If the user fails to select an option from the radio group, is this a > choice the user made, or did they fail to select an option by accident > (by forgetting to select and option, paging past the radio group, et > cetera)? In theory, I agree with you. However, UAs can't do what you ask for. Whenever a vendor has tried implementing this, they have gotten swamped with requests to change it back to the IE-compatible behaviour. Sites depend on this behaviour, and break without it. This is one of those cases where our hands are tied by legacy content. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2004 18:33:38 UTC