Matt Wynne wrote: > > +1 to all that. I feel like you get lectured quite a bit by this list > James, but you'd do well to heed the advice of some battle-hardened > journeymen, IMO. >
I thought that you might like to know that, after reflecting on this overnight, I took this matter up in a design meeting today. After a "frank exchange of ideas" it was accepted that login, and all its related ilk, did not describe what the application was doing and was therefore misleading and depreciated. The clincher was when I raised the issue of authentication via end user x.509 certificates. So, what we have now are features that read like this: When the user "myuser" authenticates with a password When the user is not authenticated Then they should see the authentication page Then they should see an authentication request message Then they press the authenticate button When the user session is not current We have, in consequence, gone through and removed the term login from all code use as well; replacing it with authenticate. So, for example, the authentication form now says: To Proceed Please Authenticate Yourself I am sometimes (ok, mostly) slow to understand what I am told, but I do hear it. Thanks for all the help on this. I believe that the discussion here regarding the entire nomenclature issue provided a real improvement to our design. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
