[23.0] Remove "required" indicator from tool interface Radio select elements

[ahmedhamidawan]

I have removed the * required indicator from radio FormSelects, like the one below. Fixes #15368

There is ambiguity on whether the same should be done for some drop-down fields that have a "blank" default value, as discussed here: #15368 (comment)

How to test the changes?

(Select all options that apply)

• I've included appropriate automated tests.
• This is a refactoring of components with existing test coverage.
• Instructions for manual testing are as follows:
  1. [add testing steps and prerequisites here if you didn't write automated tests covering all your changes]

License

• I agree to license these and all my past contributions to the core galaxy codebase under the MIT license.

[mvdbeek]

I don't think that was the conclusion from #15368 ? I think it makes sense to be consistent here and label these as required. Yes, in Galaxy radio buttons are only valid for required, non-multiple parameters (why that is I don't know, seems like an arbitrary restriction), but that isn't true for other web forms on other platforms that users may be familiar with. At the minimum the indicator helps answer the question "do I really need to choose something here or is there a way to unselect something here". Also the isEmpty -> red color convention is great. @wm75 did you think this was confusing, or did you think this was only odd ? I'd only change this if this is really confusing.

[ahmedhamidawan]

Yes, in Galaxy radio buttons are only valid for required, non-multiple parameters (why that is I don't know, seems like an arbitrary restriction), but that isn't true for other web forms on other platforms that users may be familiar with.

@mvdbeek
You have a good point here. We can decide to abandon the idea of removing the required * indicator from radio selects then, if we have consensus. This would only leave the question of whether we need to reconsider this for drop-down selects as well (as discussed here: #15368 (comment))

[mvdbeek]

I don't see anything wrong with that either:

The parameters that are not optional are correctly marked with an asterisk. Conditional selects themselves are not required, so this all seems right to me.

[bernt-matthias]

Galaxy radio buttons are only valid for required, non-multiple parameters (why that is I don't know, seems like an arbitrary restriction)

It's not a galaxy thing. Radio buttons are defined this way, ie that they allow to select exactly one option (hence they can't be optional or multiple):
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_button

And let me just link this one #11797

[bernt-matthias]

Conditional selects themselves are not required

do you mean the select parameter of a conditional? They can't be optional by the linter

galaxy/lib/galaxy/tool_util/linters/inputs.py

Line 507 in 3841b31

f'Conditional [{conditional_name}] test parameter cannot be {incomp}="true"', node=first_param

[mvdbeek]

They can't be optional by the linter

That doesn't mean much, and there's IMHO no reason for that. You're going to take action in the when, nothing stops you from making decisions even if the value is None / null etc

[bernt-matthias]

That doesn't mean much, and there's IMHO no reason for that. You're going to take action in the when, nothing stops you from making decisions even if the value is None / null etc

Would be cool if this would already work. It was actually one of the points here: #13931 (comment). But the question of conditionals seems a bit offtopic. The main question is if radio selects can be optional.

[nsoranzo]

The main question is if radio selects can be optional.

I believe most UX design guides recommend radio buttons should not be optional, e.g. https://uxplanet.org/radio-buttons-checkboxes-toggle-switches-and-dropdown-lists-design-tips-for-using-selection-d120a1e323c5 and https://www.nngroup.com/articles/radio-buttons-default-selection/

[mvdbeek]

We all seem to be in agreement, so why don't we close this ?