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

Implement designs for sign in screens #9224

Closed
3 tasks
churik opened this issue Oct 16, 2019 · 13 comments
Closed
3 tasks

Implement designs for sign in screens #9224

churik opened this issue Oct 16, 2019 · 13 comments
Labels
feature feature requests

Comments

@churik
Copy link
Member

churik commented Oct 16, 2019

Feature Issue

User Story

As a user, I want to see consistent sign in screens across the app.

Description

Figma: Sign In Design

Summary: currently across the app we have different from design login screens and mismatch in them for ordinary accounts and for keycard.

Acceptance Criteria

For V1 is required from my POV to implement:

photo_2019-10-16 13 42 51 jpeg 2019-10-16 13-43-43

Now => should be
diffs

I think we can skip frosen account for now, I don't know should it be implemented in v1 scope or not (cc @guylouis @rachelhamlin )

dsfsddsdsdf

Cancel should be replaced with Back button, as for ordinary accounts.

Notes

I believe we can skip Trouble sign in? popup, frozen account and all flows related to biometric for now.
@rachelhamlin please, edit an issue if you think they are required for V1

@churik churik added feature feature requests v1 release labels Oct 16, 2019
@guylouis
Copy link
Contributor

waouh great point

What is the screen on the left and the one on the right, is that the difference between design and implementation, or difference between keycard multiaccount and non-keycard multiaccount ?

aslo what do you mean by frozen account ?

@andmironov
Copy link

andmironov commented Oct 16, 2019

aslo what do you mean by frozen account ?

"Frozen accounts" is something I added just recently. An account turns frozen (btw it should be "Frozen key") when the user exceeds the number of attempts to enter the correct passcode.

Screen Shot 2019-10-16 at 17 31 03

A frozen key is still listed in the list of available keys but is greyed out

Screen Shot 2019-10-16 at 17 33 48

After a brief discussion with the design team, we decided to call it "frozen". "Blocked" might refer to something that has happened on behalf of the authority. "Locked" also did not feel right, so we settled on "frozen"

@churik
Copy link
Member Author

churik commented Oct 16, 2019

@guylouis

  1. it is how it looks now vs how it is designed
  2. answered by @andmironov , thx

@hesterbruikman
Copy link
Contributor

@andmironov @yenda can you confirm flow 1 and 5 in this issue?

Following the same rationale of not showing the key on the multiple accounts (aka Your keys) screen, because it might change in the future/is not an accurate representation of the root key, I imagine we also don't want to include it in the single account view. (Currently it is included in flow 1 and 5).

Context: #8935 (comment)

@andmironov
Copy link

@hesterbruikman working on a more complete issue about Keycard sign-in with @guylouis to replace a number of smaller issues including this one will be ready next week. WIP #9264

@rachelhamlin
Copy link
Contributor

@guylouis I'm reviewing your WIP #9264 - can we align on which of these issues we're selecting to fix?

In my opinion, some of these issues are optimizations that can be punted until later, and I'd like to be consistent in fixing issues across keycard + regular screens. I think only issues pertaining to flow 5 should be fixed, because they're inconsistent with the regular screens.

Here's my take on it:

Issues identified in flow 1 + 3 do not need to be prioritized for v1.

The changes to the menu elements (... replacing the bottom options), the appropriate (reduced) main screen for single accounts, and the account type indicator (keycard icon vs. regular) are all UI optimizations.

I would like to separate out the lack of key indicator on the unlock screen, though. That to me is a v1 nice-to-have.

image

Frozen account is a feature to be proposed + ranked in objective level roadmap planning.
So, yes, out of scope.

Some of the issues in flow 5 do need to be fixed for v1.
We took the breadcrumbs out of these screens, and that should be the case for keycard as well, so these need to be removed:
image

Cancel should be replaced with back button for consistency.
image

Recover key I can change to Access key myself, but I see some other items in en.json that use the same word and don't know what they are. @guylouis do you recognize this copy?

	"recipient-code": "Enter recipient address",
	"recover": "Recover",
	"recover-key": "Recover key",
	"recover-keycard-multiaccount-not-supported": "Recovering keycard multiaccount with password is not supported",
	"recover-multiaccount-warning": "Your wallet information will be exposed by importing this multiaccount.",
	"recover-password-invalid": "This multiaccount already exists but passwords do not match",
	"recover-password-too-short": "Password is too short",
	"recover-with-keycard": "Recover with Keycard",
	"recovering-key": "Recovering key...",

Lastly, what are the different options for the ... menu at the top of the screen @churik?

@andmironov
Copy link

andmironov commented Oct 31, 2019

@rachelhamlin check out the issues in #9264, all updated and cleaned up, some new issues added after review. Also this is part of many others #9365

@yenda
Copy link
Contributor

yenda commented Nov 4, 2019

@churik @rachelhamlin @andmironov so is everything in the original issue still relevant and unique to this issue or can some of the scope be removed as already included in other issues?

@churik
Copy link
Member Author

churik commented Nov 5, 2019

I'm not sure about priorities, for me this one sounds like v1 release, I'm not sure about other stuff.

@rachelhamlin
Copy link
Contributor

rachelhamlin commented Nov 5, 2019

Nice and granular. Thank you @guylouis @andmironov! I think we can close this one and replace it with #9264?

@churik
Copy link
Member Author

churik commented Nov 5, 2019

@rachelhamlin #9264 will be in release scope?

@rachelhamlin
Copy link
Contributor

@churik I think we should segment it into P0 and P1. Working on it. I think the need to remove breadcrumbs is also missing...

@churik
Copy link
Member Author

churik commented Nov 5, 2019

@rachelhamlin feel free to close this one after prioritizing #9264

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature feature requests
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants