Skip to content

Conversation

@GayatriK2002
Copy link
Collaborator

@GayatriK2002 GayatriK2002 commented Dec 4, 2025

💡 What is the current behavior?

  • When a required IxSelect field with allowClear was cleared, the label did not visually indicate its invalid (empty, required) state by turning red.

GitHub Issue Number: #2226

JIRA ID: IX-3716

🆕 What is the new behavior?

  • When a required IxSelect field with allowClear is cleared, the label now correctly turns red, signaling that the required field is empty and invalid.

🏁 Checklist

A pull request can only be merged if all of these conditions are met (where applicable):

  • 🦮 Accessibility (a11y) features were implemented
  • 🗺️ Internationalization (i18n) - no hard coded strings
  • 📲 Responsiveness - components handle viewport changes and content overflow gracefully
  • 📕 Add or update a Storybook story
  • 📄 Documentation was reviewed/updated siemens/ix-docs
  • 🧪 Unit tests were added/updated and pass (pnpm test)
  • 📸 Visual regression tests were added/updated and pass (Guide)
  • 🧐 Static code analysis passes (pnpm lint)
  • 🏗️ Successful compilation (pnpm build, changes pushed)

👨‍💻 Help & support

@changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Dec 4, 2025

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: a3aa248

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @GayatriK2002, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a critical UI/UX bug where required IxSelect fields with the allowClear option failed to visually signal their invalid state (by turning the label red) when cleared. The changes ensure that form labels accurately reflect the validation status of their associated input fields, improving form usability and adherence to validation rules.

Highlights

  • IxSelect Invalid State Fix: Resolved an issue where the label of a required IxSelect field with allowClear did not visually indicate its invalid (empty, required) state by turning red after being cleared.
  • FormFieldLabel Logic Refinement: Introduced an explicitIsInvalid property and a @Watch decorator to correctly manage the isInvalid state, ensuring that an explicitly set invalid state for the label is not overridden by internal logic.
  • Improved htmlFor Handling: Modified the controlRef observation logic to conditionally set up the observer only when htmlFor is not present, and added a return statement in the htmlFor logic to ensure proper flow and invalid state detection for associated form elements.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

The changes effectively address the issue where the label of a required IxSelect field with allowClear did not correctly reflect an invalid (empty, required) state. The introduction of explicitIsInvalid ensures that externally set invalid states take precedence, and the refined logic for htmlFor and controlRef observers correctly prioritizes the association mechanism. The modifications improve the component's behavior and internal state management, leading to a more accurate visual representation of validation status.

@GayatriK2002 GayatriK2002 marked this pull request as ready for review December 4, 2025 09:36
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jan 7, 2026

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants