You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 12, 2019. It is now read-only.
Scenario:
Multiple instances of a form rendered on a single page.
Bug:
Clicking a label will trigger a checkbox in the wrong form.
(I have this problem in Chrome 32.0.1700.102, Linux and QtWebkit)
My solution for now is removing the "for" attribute in labels via javascript. But this is IMHO kinda ugly... :-/
In my opinion the "for"-attribute is not really needed since the input element is wrapped in the label-tag. Clicking on a parent label will propagate the click to the child input element and everything works fine.
Since the "for"-attribute is not required and the behaviour for labels with their corresponding input element wrapped inside is well defined (1) I think the best solution would be to just ommit the attribute in this case.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Scenario:
Multiple instances of a form rendered on a single page.
Bug:
Clicking a label will trigger a checkbox in the wrong form.
(I have this problem in Chrome 32.0.1700.102, Linux and QtWebkit)
My solution for now is removing the "for" attribute in labels via javascript. But this is IMHO kinda ugly... :-/
In my opinion the "for"-attribute is not really needed since the input element is wrapped in the label-tag. Clicking on a parent label will propagate the click to the child input element and everything works fine.
Since the "for"-attribute is not required and the behaviour for labels with their corresponding input element wrapped inside is well defined (1) I think the best solution would be to just ommit the attribute in this case.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: