-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Invalid (free-form) select component values? #3690
Comments
We have introduced a new validation on Select components that will validate the value to ensure it is a selectable option. It is an optional validation and can be found on the new renderer @ https://monosnap.com/file/uVLw9Bsgp2lunxLgTspTaupUhwERV0 Will this work for your case? |
@travist That works, but how do I use it? Do we need to upgrade our portal and formio.js? |
This is part of our 4.13.x release, which is still in RC and we have some known regressions and bugs. Because of this, I would say we need to wait to use it as part of a production release, but if you wish to try it out, then you can upgrade your renderer in your application with this renderer version and then using the Edit JSON feature of the form builder, you will add the following to the select component.
|
We're currently addressing a backlog of GitHub issues. Closing this thread as it is outdated. Please re-open if it is still relevant. Thank you for your contribution! |
We've discovered some instances (a very small fraction: 64 out of ~100k) of submissions with what appear to be free-form values in a select component using the Choices.js widget. It's not exactly dire because the number of bad rows is manageable, but it could be an issue for us in the long term because data integrity on this field is important.
My hunch is that this is a browser compatibility issue in Choices.js and/or formio.js, and that a JS error is allowing the component to accept whatever value is in the search input. We've been flushing the submissions from form.io to remove PII so I don't have the browser metadata handy, but I'm curious if anyone has seen this before.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: