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
It seems that the final date field accepts three digits. In some scenarios the third digit disappears, while in others it sticks around even after the component loses focus. The good news is that I wasn't able to force the input to accept an invalid number (such as 060) but the third digit is confusing some of my app's users.
We can see three-digits working in the demo website with both all-zeroes and with a number that evaluates to a valid second (000 - 059 are valid)
The component, styled for my own app, omits the Seconds field, but you can see the three-digit problem with other fields, and it's possible to put triple digits in multiple fields.
Is this intentional and serves some niche purpose, or is this an unexpected UI bug?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Look like a duplicate of #84, although I couldn't find it with key words. Stumbled across it while browsing through the outstanding issues. I'll close this one!
It seems that the final date field accepts three digits. In some scenarios the third digit disappears, while in others it sticks around even after the component loses focus. The good news is that I wasn't able to force the input to accept an invalid number (such as 060) but the third digit is confusing some of my app's users.
We can see three-digits working in the demo website with both all-zeroes and with a number that evaluates to a valid second (000 - 059 are valid)
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4935079/86274073-226d3d00-bb9f-11ea-8db5-6f856cbf50cb.png)
The component, styled for my own app, omits the Seconds field, but you can see the three-digit problem with other fields, and it's possible to put triple digits in multiple fields.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4935079/86274881-601e9580-bba0-11ea-99d3-5ce758b56bb3.png)
Is this intentional and serves some niche purpose, or is this an unexpected UI bug?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: