Containers with really long identity name break the UX
Categories
(Core :: DOM: Security, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: jkt, Assigned: sdk)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
(Whiteboard: [userContextId][domsecurity-backlog])
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Comment 10•8 years ago
|
||
Updated•3 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Updated•3 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•3 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•3 years ago
|
||
I don't think limiting the container name is the right approach.
Looking at it today a bit more, I now agree with Itiel. There's a few issues with enforcing a maxlength as a solution:
- It'll most likely affect different locales than english a lot more especially if the limit is 30 chars.
- Even 30 chars use more than half of the urlbar before we hit the rule to completely hide the label when the window width is lower than Nth pixels.
- Applying a limit in the chrome or in about:preference#containers won't prevent an addon using the ContextualIdentities API to create a container with more than 30 characters long name. I don't think we want to apply this limit directly on the API itself either.
Based on that, Itiel proposition to visually truncate the container name label seems like the right approach. We should enforce a max percentage that the label can use and be a little more aggressive in applying the rule that completely hide it when the window width is reduced (See 2). The container icon is still present whatever the width is and you can hover over to show a tooltip containing the name. This should be enough for the user to know in which container they are especially that I'm guessing it's pretty rare for users to have a window small that half the screen width.
Comment 13•1 years ago
|
||
Looks like this hasn't seen a lot of attention but is still worth fixing.
I want to point out that a hover over the container slip will give you the full name. A visual restriction sounds fine, as it would still give the ability to view the full string. Risk is furthermore limited as the container information is always user supplied (modulo defaults and translations).
Are you still interested in pursuing this, Danny?
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•1 years ago
|
||
Yes, I'm still interested. I don't know if it's enough to simply visually hide the text when the name is too long. It might make it looks like the UI is broken since the hiding mechanism isn't tied up to a user interaction (e.g. reducing the window width).
As I already pointed out, dynamically hiding it (e.g. full name > 30 chars > fully hidden) is also a bit tricky since in some cases even 30 chars is long enough to visually break things.
:freddy do you have any suggestion? Should we ask the UX team?
Comment 15•1 years ago
|
||
I could imagine us assigning a max-width of some size and using text-overflow: ellipsis
to indicate that there's text missing.
I've asked around internally to ensure that we're not missing some obvious widely used internal pattern that we can simply adopt by adding a smart class attribute or such.
What I can say from staring at searchfox for a bit is that ellipsis
is the more widely used value (in comparison to fade
).
Updated•1 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 16•1 years ago
|
||
Comment 17•1 year ago
|
||
Comment 18•1 year ago
|
||
bugherder |
Updated•1 year ago
|
Description
•