On Wed, 2001-10-24 at 15:40, Dan Winship wrote:
It didn't seem too much overhead to just run gpg/pgp and display the appropriate icon. Having to grab the mouse to validate a signature is (IMO) an annoying regression.It's not a bug, it's a feature. If the message told you whether or not it was valid when you first looked at it, then you wouldn't ever bother to click, and so someone could send you an HTML message that just looked like it was signed but really only had a static "Yup, it's valid" graphic embedded in it.
Ok - you got me - good point. Trusted path, etc, etc. I admit I didn't think about that aspect of having to explicitly initiate signature validation.
What it really needs is a keybinding to verify, but well, we need lots of keyboard navigability. Maybe in 1.1.
True - should I open a bug (or at least a placeholder bug)?
The big problem, as you said, is that it's too big. We just stole it from Red Carpet temporarily until we could get our own graphic. I agree that locks may not be the right idiom for signing though.
How 'bout just scaling down the wax seal? Like the one attached (I don't have the broken one - so I just grabbed from red carpet and scaled w/ gimp ;) -- Dan Berger [dberger ix netcom com] http://home.ix.netcom.com/~dberger Inter arma silent leges "Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." Justice Louis Brandeis, dissenting, Olmstead v US (1928) A982 E6B1 CB2F 7A49 843A 9297 DA73 4371 1F54 8D0C
Attachment:
small-seal.png
Description: PNG image
Attachment:
pgpHuoLhXBYCz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
