[Cmb-users] Dealing with passwords in attributes

[Robert Michael O'Bara]

OK - so I think this sounds like we could use more discussion on “roles” in general so here is what I suggest:

Add a “private” property to item definition - it will have  the following effect:

1. Will not write out values to attribute file
2. Hide the text w/r to the line edit widget.

Bob

Robert M. O'Bara, MEng.
Assistant Director of Scientific Computing

Kitware Inc.
28 Corporate Drive
Suite 101
Clifton Park, NY 12065

Phone: (518) 881- 4931




> On Feb 1, 2016, at 11:59 AMEST, David Thompson <david.thompson at kitware.com> wrote:
> 
>> But in that case the roles will be different for each data item - assuming that the roles are enumerations and not just strings.  I’m wondering if your use case would be better served by creating a new item - “geometric coordinate" that could have additional meta data (is it spatial or parametric, etc..).
> 
> I am fine with strings instead of enums as long as the strings are documented. :-)
> 
> It does seem like we need to be careful to keep the UI out of the data. Passwords really are not UI-specific; the UI and I/O layers might build behavior for dealing with items in that role but most/all of that logic should not be part of the attribute itself. If none of the logic needs to go with the attribute, then I vote for avoiding a new class.
> 
> 	David

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/cmb-users/attachments/20160201/5bde9bbb/attachment.html>