This will be true even for a non-wrapped input, if the id prop is passed in. The/one of the main benefits for wrapping the input in a label is that we don't need to pass an id into the input nor the for attribute to the label.

cc @edonehoo wdyt of the above?

Our recent content research study suggested that people liked having a non-technical description ahead of tech specifics, so I would also consider adding something like "You can increase the size of a checkbox's clickable area to span wider than the checkbox label." and a line break prior to this sentence.

My usual string of multiple questions: Should we also mention the isLabelWrapped prop? Does this prop handle what you described behind the scenes? Where does the for attribute come into play (since I'm not seeing it in the other examples to contrast)?

If so, it may be more helpful to say something like:

"To expand the clickable area, add the isLabelWrapped prop. This wraps the checkbox input with a label element, which removes the need to pass id to the component"

(of course, all of this ^ may need to be combined with what you said/remixed for accuracy)

@edonehoo the checkbox and radio components are a little confusing at first I think.

The for property doesn't need to be passed in, but rather passing in an id will set the for property internally. So something like would render:

(or something like that)

I think your last suggestion looks good, maybe just rearranging a little: "To expand the clickable area without needing to pass an id in, add the isLabelWrapped prop."

Not a blocker, though, more nitpicky I may be overly worried about conveying the idea that "the only way to expand the clickable area is with isLabelWrapped"

ah, I see! Thanks for explaining! In that case, I think your rearranged suggestion sounds great

@thatblindgeye

This will be true even for a non-wrapped input, if the id prop is passed in.

Is the behavior when passing id vs isLabelWrapped really the same? What I meant by the description is that the space between the text and checkbox is also clickable.

Here is an example with using id:

And here with isLabelWrapped:

Good example is also this: https://ux.stackexchange.com/a/47920

I really like both your's and Erin's descriptions, I just thought we should say why is wrapping in a label different than using just the id (with the internal for attribute)

Ah I misread then I think, I see what you mean now. Since like you commented below id is required, maybe we could combine your original comment plus the above, something like "To expand the clickable area, add the isLabelWrapped property. This will allow a checkbox description or the space between the input and label to be clickable."? @edonehoo how does that sound, and do you think the example should include a description to better convey the behavior?

We should keep id required, as even when the label element wraps the input it could still help prevent any issues by explicitly linking the two via for and id.

Hm if the space between the checkbox and label is specifically important to call out, then I think that sounds good. I stuck with the more generic "expand the clickable area" because it seems like you can also click to the right of the label to select it, so I wanted to cover both cases. WDYT?

I would definitely add an example description, so putting it all together, maybe something like this:

You can expand the clickable area of a checkbox so that it spans wider than the checkbox label. This allows users to select a checkbox by clicking the checkbox itself, the label, or the area between the checkbox and the label.

To expand the clickable area of a checkbox, add the isLabelWrapped property.