Maybe just keep the email address in the session for this purpose. You could 
still use Auth decorators if desired:
 
@auth.requires(session.email!=None)
 
As for accessing the shopping cart on a return visit, you might enable that 
via a long session expiration, but I'm not sure it's a good idea to allow 
access simply by entering a matching email address (without a password and 
with no active session).
 
Anthony

On Tuesday, August 23, 2011 1:43:48 PM UTC-4, peter wrote:

> I have been thinking about keeping registering and ‘logging in’ to  a 
> minimum on websites. We all hate registering with websites unless 
> absolutely necessary, right? I am building an online store for music 
> downloads. If the user does an 'add to cart', it would be nice if they 
> did not have to register or login, but only provide their email 
> address. Admin could provide a provisional login. One would decorate 
> relevant functions with @auth.requires.provisional.login. 
>
> The provisional login would only ask the users for their email address 
> (and explain this is just to use as a unique identifier for them). 
> Auth.user.id would work correctly if they had previously registered. 
> If they had not previously registered, a record would be added to 
> db.auth_user, giving a new auth.user.id. The user could remain at this 
> provisional login stage whilst viewing the cart and doing various 
> other activities. 
>
> The user need only register after they click ‘pay now’. If they have 
> previously registered then they need not login even at the ‘pay now’ 
> stage. Only when they go to view their paid for downloads should they 
> need to login. 
>
> I am a big fan of websites being as friendly as possible and as 
> unofficious as they can be. 
>
> I had original thought that the provisional auth_user records would be 
> deleted after 24 hours, but I think it is actually better if they 
> remain in the database, then users can come back and access their cart 
> at a later date. 
>
> What do other people think of this idea. It does not seem to reduce 
> security. 
>
> Peter 
>

Reply via email to