New Character Set selection interface

[tanstaafl]

Anybody know how the attachment in this post was included?

Note how the embedded .pbg graphic is apparently 'attached', and toggles between a smaller version and a larger version when clicked on...

How would I do this if/when I wanted to include attachments in a similar fashion?

Thanks,

Charles

[Miquel 'Fire' Burns]

I think it may only work with attached images.

[Miquel 'Fire' Burns]

BTW, with the not deleting character sets, how do you prevent having 100s of characters sets only because you couldn't delete them? (And about half of them are the same because you didn't label them clearly enough to know that you're recreating them)

Remember, not everyone who uses this will be programmers, engineers, or something else that requires alot of thinking.

[tanstaafl]

I think it may only work with attached images.

Yeah, I figured it out right after I posted... thanks...

BTW, with the not deleting character sets, how do you prevent having 100s of characters sets only because you couldn't delete them? (And about half of them are the same because you didn't label them clearly enough to know that you're recreating them)

Actually, I was talking about only not being able to delete the initial/primary 'Default' character sets. Of course any new/additional ones created by the user should be deletable... except what if they are in use by an Account? Maybe if you attempt to delete one that is in use, it gives you a list of the Accounts using it telling you you need to change these before you can delete it?

[Miquel 'Fire' Burns]

I really don't like having to goto another tab just to edit a character set though. Unless it's used for template purposes, having each have it's own copy should be fine (and if the UI thing I created is used, then the most users care about is if the site they're making the account for allows one of the four predefined sets of characters or not, and for the most part, only the special characters will be removed. Though, changes in the middle don't work too well)

Remember, in practice, some things that seem like a good idea may actually be the worst idea you could have.

[tanstaafl]

I really don't like having to goto another tab just to edit a character set though.

<snip>

Unless it's used for template purposes, having each have it's own copy should be fine (and if the UI thing I created is used, then the most users care about is if the site they're making the account for allows one of the four predefined sets of characters or not, and for the most part, only the special characters will be removed. Though, changes in the middle don't work too well)

Hmmm... taking another look for context... oh! I think I may have misunderstood...

Ok, a few questions... what if I want the resulting characters in a slightly different order? One thing I do currently is I make a few minor changes to the character sets I use, to introduce another wrinkle for anyone trying to get at my passwords... changes that are easy for me to reproduce from scratch should the need arise, but that are not very obvious.

Also - you have an 'Custom/Extra' field - what about an 'Exclude' field - whatever entered there is subtracted from the character set?

Or, if the intent is for it to work in such a manner that you would use it to 'create' the character set, which would then become a separate, editable string that I could manipulate manually, that would work - but I'd still like an 'Exclude' field...

Remember, in practice, some things that seem like a good idea may actually be the worst idea you could have.

Heh... I know,

[Miquel 'Fire' Burns]

That's just a proof of concept thing. I'm sure there's some tweaks you can do anyway to add more control.

The logic I assumed when I wrote that is that the character set is still stored the same way, just the user can use those check boxes to control it. Now if you want to make a change outside of the use if an exclude field, I don't see that happening. Maybe if we implement that, there's an advance mode for the character set to allow editing like it is now (maybe another option in the global option tab?).

Anyway, an exclude field would break the input box a bit with the current code (as I wrote that assuming that if this was used, it would read from the config setting (RDF file in Firefox's case, xml in Desktop's case) and populate the rest of the fields like that to the user, then store the output back in the config setting). I know it can be done, but I may need to rewrite the code behind it. Like I said in the other topic (which people can't get to unless they're admins BTW Eric), the logic is horrid.

[tanstaafl]

That's just a proof of concept thing. I'm sure there's some tweaks you can do anyway to add more control.

No worries - you made it plain it was just a rough draft...

The logic I assumed when I wrote that is that the character set is still stored the same way, just the user can use those check boxes to control it. Now if you want to make a change outside of the use if an exclude field, I don't see that happening. Maybe if we implement that, there's an advance mode for the character set to allow editing like it is now (maybe another option in the global option tab?).

How about if it just works as a character set 'creator', then you have to click a button to 'Save' it, after which it would be a separate, standalone editable string?

Anyway, an exclude field would break the input box a bit with the current code (as I wrote that assuming that if this was used, it would read from the config setting (RDF file in Firefox's case, xml in Desktop's case) and populate the rest of the fields like that to the user, then store the output back in the config setting). I know it can be done, but I may need to rewrite the code behind it. Like I said in the other topic (which people can't get to unless they're admins BTW Eric), the logic is horrid.

I was going to ask you about that 'Input' box - I didn't understand its purpose...

Maybe do away with it, then add an 'Exclude' field below/after the Custom/Extra field? This, with the ability to 'save' the character set as a standalone string, rather than keeping it in a dynamic state, would be perfect.

In fact - I don't like the idea of keeping it in a dynamic state like that when actually being used... not sure why, it just seems a little risky to me - maybe too much room for accidentally changing it...

[Miquel 'Fire' Burns]

The user would only see the check boxes, and the Custom/Extra (Actually, it's labeled that way because I couldn't choose which to use myself). Input would come from the RDF file, and output goes back to the RDF.

Plus if a site decides to change the rules for their character set, and you need to change yours, but PasswordMaker doesn't allow it...

The only thing I find wrong with PasswordMaker when it comes to make passwords is just on the UI side of things (BTW, I need to check to see if there's a request for combining the Master Password prompt and the Select Account prompt, I mean there's that list box there after all) and the fact we tend to fix issues by telling users to switch to advance view...

BTW, I'm trying to design the Desktop Edition to not need an advance view, or if there is one, enough is in basic view that won't require too many people to switch it to, only those that like using advance views would switch to it for normal use (like me!)