Community
Participate
Working Groups
In a UX discussion with McQ, Simon, Ken, Anton...we talked about having the user name link take you to the settings page. Then the settings page would have a category called "user profile."
If there are more services that require authentication, there is no user name at the top, but just 'Profiles' link that allow to navigate to user profile pages for secured services. Moreover if there is no authenticationPlugin installed, there is no user name or 'Profiles' link at all. As I understand, you would like to place details gathered using authPlugins on Settings page. Including Sign In/Out actions? Could you prepare a mockup illustrating what you want to do?
Other problem is that we have a rather twisted logic in displaying the user profile that I'm not so sure is something we really need. The idea was born when we assumed our authentication would be "pluggable". We may use our own user storage or, for instance, ldap. Profile for those users may be different. That's why server bundle contributes a plugin that describes the profile structure (names and types of attributes, what sections should they be grouped in) and client only renders it.
As a first step I'll work to develop the UI within the settings context, then connect with others to better understand how we want to integrate the UI with it's data source. Question - should I omit the external account section for now? Is that actually supported?
cc'ing Simon for input. Early in 0.5 Simon was telling me that he wanted to separate the concept of the Orion user from various service login/authentication strategies. He was thinking the Orion user owns all the settings, so that even a user with no file systems still had an Orion identity, had established preferences, etc. Simon, is this still your view of the world? If so, then I would imagine that moving the auth profile stuff into settings lines up nicely. The user link would always be the user name, and if there are multiple authentication strategies for different file services and other services, those are managed in a settings page. (In reply to comment #3) > Question - should I omit the external account section for now? Is that actually > supported? It is supported, but as I understand it, it's a bit weird because you have to create an orion account before you can then tie other accounts to it. I opened bug 376994 for this and assigned it to Simon, because he is looking at improving the workflow for a new user to get into orionhub. I would imagine that Anton, Simon, Szymon, Gosia need to talk about what is needed (I'm just opening the bugs completeness but don't claim to know any details about it!)
(In reply to comment #3) > Question - should I omit the external account section for now? Is that actually > supported? Yes, it's supported. I'm using my Google account to log it all the time.
(In reply to comment #4) > cc'ing Simon for input. Early in 0.5 Simon was telling me that he wanted to > separate the concept of the Orion user from various service > login/authentication strategies. He was thinking the Orion user owns all the > settings, so that even a user with no file systems still had an Orion identity, had established preferences, etc. What about logging in to the preferences service? > It is supported, but as I understand it, it's a bit weird because you have to > create an orion account before you can then tie other accounts to it. I opened > bug 376994 for this and assigned it to Simon, because he is looking at > improving the workflow for a new user to get into orionhub. I would imagine > that Anton, Simon, Szymon, Gosia need to talk about what is needed (I'm just > opening the bugs completeness but don't claim to know any details about it!) I've replied you on this bug. Workflow on orionhub and orion.eclipse.org are this way because we have disabled this user account creation.
Please draw a mockup or something illustrating what kind of changes we want to have here? I would like to see how the UI would look like for multiple secured services, multiple user profiles etc. on the other side I would like to see the UI when we have no authentication plugins.
(In reply to comment #4) > He was thinking the Orion user owns all the > settings, so that even a user with no file systems still had an Orion identity, > had established preferences, etc. > > Simon, is this still your view of the world? Yes definitely. My view is that your Orion identity is tied to where you are getting your settings from. So, in that sense the information currently on the user-profile page is a "Category" on the settings page. Szymon and I just were messaging around the notions of multiple authenticated services. The capsule summary is that we do not manage multiple user profiles -- just the user profile associated with the settings. Also, we still lack a UI that will let us manage additional authenticated sources. One ideas for those cases we might do something in plugin settings(??) where an Authentication Plugin optionally provides "external links" for "login, logoff, and profile management".
Szymon as I mentioned in our ST chat, I will attach a screenshot/mockup to start discussing as soon as I have one ready. I've only really begun working on this, so please be patient. Hopefully at some point tomorrow. However - all I'm really doing is moving the current UI to the settings UI structure, so you can probably imagine how it will look. I have questions about some parts too, though. I'm not sure that I can use my generation approach in this case. We'll see. I'll need to experiment, but given the requirements of attaching this UI to seemingly adaptable inputs of user information rather than user preferences, it might be tricky for me. Just give me a little bit of time - I can't complete the work without the help of others that know more about user profiles in Orion. I do think it is a good direction to collect this within settings. Also - right now in my hosted Orion, when I look at the profile for my user, I see this: {"HttpCode":404,"Message":"File not found: /FF/bundles/org.eclipse.orion.client.users.ui/web/profile/user-profile.html","Severity":"Error","Code":0}{"HttpCode":404,"Message":"File not found: /orion1903.orion.eclipse.org/profile/user-profile.html","Severity":"Error","Code":0} as my page. I do see it for the orion.eclipse.org that I logged into. (In reply to comment #7) > Please draw a mockup or something illustrating what kind of changes we want to > have here? I would like to see how the UI would look like for multiple secured > services, multiple user profiles etc. on the other side I would like to see the > UI when we have no authentication plugins.
(In reply to comment #9) > Also - right now in my hosted Orion, when I look at the profile for my user, I > see this: > > {"HttpCode":404,"Message":"File not found: > /FF/bundles/org.eclipse.orion.client.users.ui/web/profile/user-profile.html","Severity":"Error","Code":0}{"HttpCode":404,"Message":"File > not found: > /orion1903.orion.eclipse.org/profile/user-profile.html","Severity":"Error","Code":0} > > as my page. I do see it for the orion.eclipse.org that I logged into. > This may be because I recently renamed org.eclipse.orion.client.users.ui to org.eclipse.orion.client.users and you have an old definition of your site. Go to Sites and in your self-hosting site definition change "org.eclipse.orion.client.users.ui" to "org.eclipse.orion.client.users". The new sites definitions should be OK.
Created attachment 214205 [details] User profile as a setting category Here's what I'm thinking - to add it as a category in settings. I'll need to add in the commands. Very similar in functionality to the current page, but aligned to other settings. I think it looks clean and straight forward. I changed some names in this version. I looked at some other sites to compare, but tried not to change too much for now.
Nice work Anton.
(In reply to comment #11) > Created attachment 214205 [details] > User profile as a setting category How do you add a linked account?
(In reply to comment #13) > (In reply to comment #11) > > Created attachment 214205 [details] > > User profile as a setting category > > How do you add a linked account? "Account", "Password" and "Git Creds" sections are trivial. I would change "Linked Accounts" though. What does it mean if I check Google box? I would rather see a section action "Add". When clicked you will see a slideout with supported OpenId providers and when you click one, you will start the process for linking accounts or we would just show OpenId providers icons as section icons and when one is clicked we start the process. Note that we can have multiple accounts from the same provider assigned to our Orion profile and displaying any details about linked OpenId account would help.
I'm still thinking about the linked section. At the moment, it would work similarly to the way it does now when you click an icon. If you click an unchecked box it starts the process. Right now on the existing UI, I can only add one google account at a time. I didn't explore opienid. I'll think some more about it. It may result in a less complicated interface if linked accounts was a setting category in itself. (In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #13) > > (In reply to comment #11) > > > Created attachment 214205 [details] > > > User profile as a setting category > > > > How do you add a linked account? > > "Account", "Password" and "Git Creds" sections are trivial. I would change > "Linked Accounts" though. What does it mean if I check Google box? > > I would rather see a section action "Add". When clicked you will see a slideout > with supported OpenId providers and when you click one, you will start the > process > for linking accounts > > or > > we would just show OpenId providers icons as section icons and when one is > clicked we start the process. > > Note that we can have multiple accounts from the same provider assigned to our > Orion profile and displaying any details about linked OpenId account would > help.
Presumably we've been showing these provider icons so that the user knows right away what is possible as far as linking external accounts. If we are still wanting to highlight this feature, what if we showed a list of all possible (like the checkboxes) but instead of checkboxes we had an add button, and if you have one linked, you can see the info, delete it, etc. Something like: [google icon] MyLinkedAccount@gmail.com [X] [Edit] [+] [google icon] MyOtherAccount@gmail.com [X] [Edit] [+] [yahoo] [+] [aol] [+] [openid] [+] When we fix bug 376899 one could argue it's not so important to highlight what is linkable here, since the user would see it up front and choose it when creating an acocunt.
If we're going to do something like this, then this section should certainly become it's own category. It will be simpler and a much better user experience to focus on it as a separate list. I'm not going to manage it within this same page. I do have some questions though. Right now I can only add one Google account. Is the intention to be able to add more? Why are we supporting the addition of so many accounts? Is there really a need to support multiple openId accounts in this? Do you anticipate that being a priority for our users? I ask, because I found this part very confusing when I was first looking at it, and again in understanding this exercise. The very fact that I'm asking these questions, and that we're discussing it so much on this thread indicates the complexity of it. Other web applications have a different, and I think consistent approach to this. When signing up to a service they typically offer account creation or logging in with FaceBook or Twitter these days. Another question - why the selection we have? why did we choose AOL? Why not FaceBook and Twitter? When we talk in terms of user experience, this differs from the 'norm' that I see these days. If this is what we want to do, then I'll create a new category for it. But I wonder if it is worth taking a step back to look at it, also in the context of the login screen for a new user. Can we not make it behave like other web apps? I've been looking at how this is managed in other apps, and on the ipad for instance when researching how best to work it. (In reply to comment #16) > Presumably we've been showing these provider icons so that the user knows right > away what is possible as far as linking external accounts. If we are still > wanting to highlight this feature, what if we showed a list of all possible > (like the checkboxes) but instead of checkboxes we had an add button, and if > you have one linked, you can see the info, delete it, etc. Something like: > > [google icon] MyLinkedAccount@gmail.com [X] [Edit] [+] > [google icon] MyOtherAccount@gmail.com [X] [Edit] [+] > [yahoo] [+] > [aol] [+] > [openid] [+] > > When we fix bug 376899 one could argue it's not so important to highlight what > is linkable here, since the user would see it up front and choose it when > creating an acocunt.
(In reply to comment #17) > Right now I can only add one Google account. Is the intention to be able to add > more? Yup. That should be possible, just restricted on the UI. > Why are we supporting the addition of so many accounts? Is there really a need > to support multiple openId accounts in this? Do you anticipate that being a > priority for our users? We support addition of accounts from various OpenId providers. So one can use Google account and another could prefer AOL. So you do not have to link them all. > Other web applications have a different, and I think consistent approach to > this. When signing up to a service they typically offer account creation or > logging in with FaceBook or Twitter these days. Some apps use just Facebook or Twitter, but others allow to log in using a wide range of OpenID providers. > Another question - why the selection we have? why did we choose AOL? Why not > FaceBook and Twitter? AFAIK FB is not an OpenID provider. It is a similar mechanism, but not OpenID. Have no idea about Twitter.
Why is it crucial to allow a user to input more than one openId account? Do you see that as a common thing happening? How many users will register more than one way of logging in at all? I just find it hard to understand why this is so important. I know that we can do it, I just wonder why we should? Can you point me to another web app where this is common practice. I know that I use my Twitter login, much more than any other at the moment. I hardly ever use openId. (In reply to comment #18) > (In reply to comment #17) > > Right now I can only add one Google account. Is the intention to be able to add > > more? > > Yup. That should be possible, just restricted on the UI. > > > Why are we supporting the addition of so many accounts? Is there really a need > > to support multiple openId accounts in this? Do you anticipate that being a > > priority for our users? > > We support addition of accounts from various OpenId providers. So one can use > Google account > and another could prefer AOL. So you do not have to link them all. > > > Other web applications have a different, and I think consistent approach to > > this. When signing up to a service they typically offer account creation or > > logging in with FaceBook or Twitter these days. > > Some apps use just Facebook or Twitter, but others allow to log in using a wide > range of OpenID providers. > > > Another question - why the selection we have? why did we choose AOL? Why not > > FaceBook and Twitter? > > AFAIK FB is not an OpenID provider. It is a similar mechanism, but not OpenID. > Have no idea about Twitter.
Just as an example, Twitter login is baked right into iOS now. It makes it really simple for apps on a iOS to use Twitter as a source of identity. (In reply to comment #19) > Why is it crucial to allow a user to input more than one openId account? Do you > see that as a common thing happening? How many users will register more than > one way of logging in at all? I just find it hard to understand why this is so > important. I know that we can do it, I just wonder why we should? Can you point > me to another web app where this is common practice. I know that I use my > Twitter login, much more than any other at the moment. I hardly ever use > openId. > > (In reply to comment #18) > > (In reply to comment #17) > > > Right now I can only add one Google account. Is the intention to be able to add > > > more? > > > > Yup. That should be possible, just restricted on the UI. > > > > > Why are we supporting the addition of so many accounts? Is there really a need > > > to support multiple openId accounts in this? Do you anticipate that being a > > > priority for our users? > > > > We support addition of accounts from various OpenId providers. So one can use > > Google account > > and another could prefer AOL. So you do not have to link them all. > > > > > Other web applications have a different, and I think consistent approach to > > > this. When signing up to a service they typically offer account creation or > > > logging in with FaceBook or Twitter these days. > > > > Some apps use just Facebook or Twitter, but others allow to log in using a wide > > range of OpenID providers. > > > > > Another question - why the selection we have? why did we choose AOL? Why not > > > FaceBook and Twitter? > > > > AFAIK FB is not an OpenID provider. It is a similar mechanism, but not OpenID. > > Have no idea about Twitter.
(In reply to comment #16) > [google icon] MyLinkedAccount@gmail.com [X] [Edit] [+] > [google icon] MyOtherAccount@gmail.com [X] [Edit] [+] > [yahoo] [+] > [aol] [+] > [openid] [+] Unfortunately I have to disappoint you a little, OpenId identifiers are not that pretty. Especially Google does what he can to hide your email and identity. My ids are: Google: https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawmzLGHBkDPLi8EoQ1Us6gnQxFvFFPSC0PU Yahoo: https://me.yahoo.com/a/e5DAN5sCtpEd7VK0T4H65A5lKTk3v_oZY34l._UAsg8tTbQ-#9d567 No way to get my.account.name@gmail out of this. As for supported OpenId providers it was thought to be configurable. Unfortunately in process of changing the login window again and again it was hard-coded at some point, I opened bug 376776 for fixing it. FB announced to be an OpenId provider quite recently I think it's a good idea to add it. Twitter is I think an OAuth, but not OpenId. We support more that one OpenId provider because this is a common practice, like here: http://www.livejournal.com/identity/login.bml Some people don't have Google account, some don't have FB. Adding more than one OpenId account to your Orion account is not so important, I think. I have two, but for most of the time I only use one. But still user should be able to change it.
Going to commit some files in support of this. I haven't finished my work on it yet, but have a lot of files changed in my view that I'd like to commit, because I've put quite a bit of work into them, and also in some style changes to settings. While I welcome feedback on what I'm committing, please understand that it isn't 100% complete.
Resolved in M2
