Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change terminology of "Login/Logout" to "Unlock/Lock" #7852

Closed
omnat opened this issue Jan 17, 2020 · 5 comments · Fixed by #7853
Closed

Change terminology of "Login/Logout" to "Unlock/Lock" #7852

omnat opened this issue Jan 17, 2020 · 5 comments · Fixed by #7853
Labels
area-permissions Issues relating to exposing permissions from the trusted MetaMask context to less-trusted contexts.

Comments

@omnat
Copy link

omnat commented Jan 17, 2020

Problem

  1. With Login Per Site functionality, we are building upon the users' behavior of logging into a site with an account. Right now we call it 'Connect', but with added permissions, an account will become more and more like a profile. For this, a clear distinction would be good between unlocking MetaMask (wallet) and logging in with web3 profiles (with accounts).

  2. Consistency across apps and platform:

  • When MetaMask is locked, sites say 'Unlock your MetaMask' which leads the user to entering MM password.

  • On MM mobile, to get into MetaMask user 'unlocks' with fingerprint or password.

Solution

  1. Change terminology of MetaMask wallet Login/Logout to Unlock/Lock .
  2. Instead of 'Connected'/'Not connected' for accounts and site connection, use 'Logged in' / 'Logged out' to communicate to users this functionality as profiles.

@rekmarks What do you think about this change?
cc @rachelcope per our conversation

@rekmarks
Copy link
Member

rekmarks commented Jan 17, 2020

@omnat Thank you for documenting this. I've had this thought while working on LoginPerSite but never documented it. My recommendation is to implement it immediately.

For implementation reference, the affected messages appear to be:

  • login
  • logout
  • logoutTimeTooGreat
  • autoLogoutTimeLimit
  • autoLogoutTimeLimitDescription

In addition, we should probably change step3HardwareWalletMsg, which currently reads:

Use your hardware account like you would with any Ethereum account. Log in to dApps, send Eth, buy and store ERC20 tokens and Non-Fungible tokens like CryptoKitties.

Suggested change:

Use your hardware account like you would with any Ethereum account. Connect to dApps, send ETH, buy and store ERC20 tokens and non-fungible tokens like CryptoKitties.

@rekmarks
Copy link
Member

rekmarks commented Jan 17, 2020

cc: @danjm @whymarrh @Gudahtt

I can just charge ahead and do this for English, but how do we handle localization in situations like this?

See: #7853

@Gudahtt
Copy link
Member

Gudahtt commented Jan 17, 2020

Changing "Login/Logout" to "Unlock/Lock" seems like a great idea to me!

I'm less sure about changing 'Connected'/'Not connected' to 'Login/Logout' though 🤔 The term "Connected" does seem, at least from my perspective, somewhat well established in the wider community already. Using "Login" for that action might also be misleading, as it doesn't exactly have the same connotations as logging in; it means the app can see the ethereum address, but it doesn't get access to a name, a profile, an avatar, or anything a user might typically expect aside from the identity itself.

We might want to reserve "Login" for a more full-featured login feature, which is certainly something we could build.

@rekmarks
Copy link
Member

It appears I didn't read @omnat's post thoroughly last night, and I missed the suggestion about changing Connected/Not connected to Login/Logout. I want to second @Gudahtt's opinion, and advise against that particular change.

It is not necessarily the case that Ethereum accounts will become "will become more and more like a profile" due to the permissions system; that is still something we have to decide.

I still unreservedly support changing Login/Logout to Unlock/Lock.

@omnat
Copy link
Author

omnat commented Jan 17, 2020

Sounds good! I'm in agreement on not changing 'Connect' terminology for now, unless suggested differently from upcoming user tests for LoginPerSite.

This was an assumption I had, so I'm glad that it's clear now we haven't defined it yet.

It is not necessarily the case that Ethereum accounts will become "will become more and more like a profile" due to the permissions system; that is still something we have to decide.

@jennypollack jennypollack added the area-permissions Issues relating to exposing permissions from the trusted MetaMask context to less-trusted contexts. label Jan 20, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area-permissions Issues relating to exposing permissions from the trusted MetaMask context to less-trusted contexts.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants