- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:44:54 +0000 (UTC)
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > The UA should not be required to provide such an ability. All radio > > buttons being unchecked in a group is an error condition. However if > > the UA wants to provide it, that's a UA thing. > > It is in error? Let me quote something: > > # Radio buttons in sets where none of the buttons are marked as checked > # must all be initially left unchecked by the UA (which differs from > # the behavior described in [RFC1866], but more accurately represents > # common implementation and author needs). That's a UA requirement, and doesn't have any bearing on whether something is an error or not. The next bit says: "Authors are recommended to always have one radio button selected. Having no radio buttons selected is considered very poor UI." which I guess means it's not really an error condition, but it is close to it. > If you allow them to be unchecked initially and a user accidently checks > one which needs to be unchecked for that particular user he/she has a > problem. The current description would allow that to happen. Yes. Like it says: it's poor UI. Authors shouldn't do it. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 21 March 2005 04:44:54 UTC