Skip to content

Improve usability of the API key overview #1296

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Darianisak
Copy link

Description

This MR amends the ApiKeyListGroupItem component to be more friendly to smaller screen sizes.

Prior to this MR, the API Keys within a Teams detail view would 'break out' of their parent div when viewing on smaller screen sizes ( < 1700px ), resulting in a clunky UX.

These overflows, while mainly a visual defect, could cause multiple buttons to share the same location, hindering accessibility.

These changes help ensure that this content is always rendered within the parent div, regardless of screen size.

Addressed Issue

#1295

Additional Details

N/A

Checklist

This commit makes the ApiKeyListGroupItem component more friendly to
smaller screen sizes, improving the UX of reviewing issued API keys
against a team.

Previously, if a window were sized below 1760px wide, the redacted
keys, as well as the "Remove, Edit, Regenerate" API Key buttons, would
overflow their parent div within the template.

These overflows, while mainly a visual defect, could cause multiple
buttons to share the same location, hindering accessibility.

These changes help ensure that this content is always rendered within
the parent div.

Regarding key rendering, it seems sensible to only render the publicId
portion of the key, as the redaction chars don't seem to add much from
a user perspective.

Signed-off-by: Darian Culver <[email protected]>
@owasp-dt-bot
Copy link

🎉 Snyk checks have passed. No issues have been found so far.

security/snyk check is complete. No issues have been found. (View Details)

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants