also sprach Santiago Ruano Rincón <santi...@debian.org> [2015-02-24 23:41 +0100]: > <santiago> what about not having a default about food? the diet field > could be mandatory, with an empty option by default > ... > <santiago> a real *-tagged field
I think this is the best suggestion so far. Form data with defaults are less useful than data from forms that force people to stop and think, so this should be a net gain. If this could be agreed upon, then maybe calling the carnivore option "I eat meat/fish when available" next to the other choices, and a free-form text field for "restrictions" will solve the issue? -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madd...@debconf.org> @martinkrafft : :' : DebConf orga team `. `'` `- DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany: http://debconf15.debconf.org DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
_______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
