[CLOSED] CheckboxGroup, RadioGroup & IE6

Hi,

The CheckboxGroup and RadioGroup examples don't work in IE6

(reported here: http://forums.ext.net/showthread.php?3578)

which wouldn't be a surprise except that the more complex ExtJS examples at

http://www.extjs.com/deploy/dev/exam...eck-radio.html

work just fine.

Do you have any suggestions of how I can correct the issues with checkboxgroup layouts for IE6?

I'm sorry I have to ask but stupid corporate environments do still exist for our customers... :(

Hi,

That extjs example (which you mentioned in your post) is working under ExtJS 3.0. If you test example in the 1.0 version of the toolkit (which based on ExtJS 3.0) then it works as well

The problem in 0.8.2 only (when group is placed FormLayout/AnchorLayout)
I can suggest the following
1. Set ItemCls for group

Code:

---

ItemCls="ie6radio"

---

2. Defined the following css rules

Code:

---

.ext-ie6 .ie6radio .x-form-element{
            position: static !important;
        }
       
        .ext-ie6 .ie6radio .x-form-check-group, .ext-ie6 .ie6radio .x-form-radio-group{
            margin-top:-20px;
        }

---

P.S margin-top value depends from FieldLabel. If FieldLabel is multi row then need increase the value

Thanks, I found that removing the Horizontal="100%" attribute from the anchor 'fixed' the issue, at least enough for my purposes here.

I'll look at updating to 1.0, I didn't sign up for the early trial so will look in to that in the next couple of days, how/where do I go for that? Nothing on home page or download?

Hi,

1.0 version under development yet (it is ready on 90-95%, we are mostly testing and making stable of 1.0 version now).

P.S. Yes, I forgot about AnchorHorizontal. IE6 does not like 100% therefore it is enought to set 99% to resolve the issue (it is better then my previous solution)

Great, thanks.

Your timing was perfect before, after going round in circles I spotted the 100% thing just as you replied! :)


Thanks again.

The items either disappear or hide below other controls. See the scrren.
The solution proposed doesn't work for me.

Is there another way to workaround this?

Attachment 2640