[thelist] clear form code

[M. Seyon]

Message from Matt Warden (3/20/2006 02:52 PM)

>On 3/20/06, Luther, Ron <Ron.Luther at hp.com> wrote:
>
>...
> > Radio buttons with no default?
>
>Like I (and the spec) said, user agents will try to handle radio
>buttons with no default, but that might mean that it selects the first
>one anyway.
>
>The bottom line is that the spec says it's not valid usage, and
>further warns that user agents handle the misuse in various ways.

I disagree.

The spec references an eleven year old document which states that it's not 
valid usage. The spec goes out of its way to state that "the current 
specification differs from RFC 1866" (the eleven year old document).

Specifications, like dictionaries (which are also regarded as definitive 
specifications of a language) evolve over time. This occurs for a variety 
of different reasons, from studied, conscious decisions made by wiser 
heads, to attempts to keep up with present day usage, which itself may have 
been brought about by the corrupted usage on the part of the masses over time.

Bottom line though, the current spec does not definitively state that radio 
buttons must have one button with a default ON state. Rather, it goes out 
of its way to mention that this is not always the case:

If no radio button in a set sharing the same control name is initially "on"...

Remember when "presently" used to exclusively mean "in the near future"? 
Now it's becoming acceptable again as a synonym to "currently". And if you 
look even further back, it once did in fact mean "currently", a state that 
fell out of favour about 400 years ago.

regards.
-marc