John Faulds wrote:
> But sometimes at least one phone number might
> be required but others are optional (e.g. mobile,
> home, fax etc) - doesn't seem as logical to split
> your phone number fields up into different
> groupings.
Great point, John. That's a conundrum for sure. And it will happen, the
frequency thereof is probably in proportion to a form's complexity. In the
example you illustrate it might be okay to stick to the required/optional
thing, like so.
Enter contact info in the form below.
fieldset
legend: required
label/input: name
label/input: email
label/input: phone
fieldset
legend: optional
label/input: fax
label/inout: web
But I can definitely see instances where that just woudn't do and the
logical groupings wouldn't allow such an easy solution. That's when we'd
have to revisit one of the other methods we've been comtemplating I suppose,
treating each occurence independantly unless a one-size-fits-all solution is
found. A likely candidate might be putting the word in the in the label.
fieldset
legend: foo stuff
label/input: required foo one
label/input: optional foo two
label/input: required foo red
label/input: optional foo blue
:-)
Cheers.
Mike Cherim
http://green-beast.com/
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
