Re: :invalid

On 9/24/10 12:46 AM, Ryan Seddon wrote:
> At the moment a field is invalid straight away if it has the required
> attribute.
> My idea was to have a third state that a required field can be
> indeterminate.
> The same state that radio and checkbox inputs have [2]. Basically a field
> technically is neither valid nor invalid until it has a value to work with.

Man, I hate divergent threads....  Since the cross-post was sent 
completely separately to both lists, the two partsof the discussion are 
missing each other.

On whatwg, I suggested a psuedo-class that matches if the current value 
is the same as the default value as a possible way of addressing this 
problem.  Note that this is not the same as testing for "empty value" 
unless the default is empty, though.

-Boris

Received on Friday, 24 September 2010 15:47:26 UTC