+1 for 2nd option

-----Original Message-----
From: Igor Vaynberg <igor.vaynb...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:46:40 
To: <users@wicket.apache.org>
Reply-To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Behavior of CheckBox With Respect to setRequired(true)

+1 for option 2

-igor


On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 10:34 AM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> This has been discussed before
> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1221), but I can't find
> the old vote thread to see what folks think.  The problem is that a
> checkbox is a weird bird when it comes to HTTP.  If it's unchecked, it
> doesn't send a value which makes Wicket think you haven't provided a
> value for that input field.  Right now, if you call setRequired(true)
> on a CheckBox, it's going to require the user to actually check the
> box.  What do folks think the desired behavior should be?
>
> 1.  The current approach is correct, requiring a checkbox means
> requiring that it be checked.
>
> 2.  A checkbox shouldn't be able to be required.  You can't *not*
> provide a value (it's binary) for a checkbox, so therefore it always
> should satisfy the required requirement.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org

Reply via email to