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

ScienceMesh: Rephrase "Invite users" #11566

Open
mmattel opened this issue Sep 11, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

ScienceMesh: Rephrase "Invite users" #11566

mmattel opened this issue Sep 11, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
Category:Enhancement Add new functionality Priority:p4-low Low priority

Comments

@mmattel
Copy link
Contributor

mmattel commented Sep 11, 2024

When setting up a federation, before sharing resources, one party needs to generate an invite token and the other one needs to accept it.

What is maybe clear to devs is not for ordinary users.
This is because the step is two fold: invite to federate and share resources

Using the term Invite users without context can lead to misunderstanding about the purpose.

Therefore Invite users should be rephrased to Invite users to federate.

image

@JammingBen

@mmattel mmattel added the Category:Enhancement Add new functionality label Sep 11, 2024
@JammingBen
Copy link
Contributor

@tbsbdr What do you think?

@tbsbdr
Copy link

tbsbdr commented Sep 12, 2024

In general, martin is right that context for the whole userflow is missing. the whole ui needs a ux overhaul.
At the moment I'd not try to improve the current ui (though it needs an improvement) because it was designed like that by cern and on the other hand we should have a better concept in general to improve it. so from perspecitve, id set this issue on hold.

@kulmann
Copy link
Contributor

kulmann commented Sep 25, 2024

For when we work on a UX overhaul in the future: while Invite users to federate is more precise than the current wording, I still find it hard to understand for "normal" (i.e. not science community) users and as such not a good alternative.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Category:Enhancement Add new functionality Priority:p4-low Low priority
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants