18:59:59 <isabela> #startmeeting ux and TB teams sync
18:59:59 <MeetBot> Meeting started Wed Apr 25 18:59:59 2018 UTC.  The chair is isabela. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:59:59 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
19:00:21 <isabela> antonela: which ticket do you want to start with?
19:01:11 <antonela> #25695
19:01:19 <antonela> lets talk about about:tor!
19:01:23 <isabela> ok!
19:01:31 <antonela> this ticket is kind of huge and includes different steps
19:01:46 <antonela> we already talked a little bit about it and i updated the ticket
19:02:00 <antonela> basically im using 2 firefox ui/ux for onboarding
19:02:18 <antonela> one of them is for new users and the walk-through for new features
19:02:48 <antonela> **disclaimer** All the copy text you find there is placeholder and needs work
19:03:29 <antonela> but inicially, i'd like to know if you think i'm missing something important compared with the old/current one about:tor content
19:04:12 <antonela> then, we can talk about the onboardings :)
19:04:18 <antonela> <done>
19:04:22 <antonela> lol
19:04:24 <mcs> Thinking at a high level, the about:tor redesign should take into account the “Tor is not working” case we have now as well as the banner we insert for the end-of-year fundraising campaign.
19:04:38 <mcs> (assuming we want to have such a banner each year)
19:04:54 <GeKo> antonela: so, this is dealing with #24918 as well?
19:05:09 <GeKo> i was wondering whether that's the case or not while looking at #24309
19:05:30 <antonela> mcs: yes! about:tor different states is something we need to consider, i think we have a ticket for alert pages tho
19:05:34 <antonela> GeKo, yes
19:05:41 <GeKo> ok
19:05:44 <mcs> I also wonder if we need the "Test Tor Network Settings" (check.tpo) link which we have today.
19:05:48 * isabela has some links from the current page that i think should be at the new design as well (donation, tor manual, tips)
19:06:07 <arthuredelstein> Are we looking at 25695-about.png right now?
19:06:08 <antonela> is for circuits, but im trying to setup a 'framework' to replicate those flows for other features/changes too
19:06:22 <GeKo> arthuredelstein: and the other one
19:06:33 <antonela> yes
19:06:35 <antonela> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/25695/25695-about.png
19:06:43 <antonela> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/25695/25695-about-new-feature-walkthrough.png
19:06:50 <antonela> sorry they are super big and the preview is not working
19:06:55 <antonela> sorry for that :(
19:07:01 <isabela> is ok
19:07:22 <arthuredelstein> they look cool!
19:07:25 <GeKo> antonela: i think i like the general idea for dividing the about:tor page into areas
19:07:40 <GeKo> which are used for different things
19:07:50 <GeKo> while the things stay basically the same
19:08:27 <GeKo> so, users get essentially trained to see, "oh, that's a critical message"
19:08:42 <GeKo> or "oh, that's a new feature" just be looking at the relevant area
19:08:43 <isabela> yep, that is nice
19:08:49 <antonela> yes, is the idea
19:08:58 <antonela> also is a common pattern for notifications
19:09:00 <antonela> but
19:09:02 <brade> I like the areas but I’m worried users will never see the new feature onboarding because it is “below the fold” on most laptops
19:09:03 <antonela> i mentioned that 'update tor' is another ticket which im still reading so maybe we can talk about it next week
19:09:40 <antonela> brade: im designing on 1000X1000 px browser which i think is the TorBrowser's default
19:09:47 <antonela> the main idea is to have it above the fold tho
19:10:29 <brade> the height is limited by the user’s display; mine is 800 (some will be 600 high)
19:10:54 <antonela> oh cool, we still have room to collapse sections
19:11:06 <antonela> i mean, to compress no collapse
19:11:30 <arthuredelstein> I guess this can be a "responsive design"
19:11:40 <antonela> arthuredelstein: please :)
19:12:12 <arthuredelstein> Is the plan to have the same more or less for mobile?
19:12:16 <antonela> if this version is good enough, i'll prepare mobile mocks which yes, should adapt
19:12:30 <isabela> cool
19:12:42 <antonela> arthuredelstein: yes
19:13:02 <brade> in a RTL language will they switch sides (version number and new user)?
19:13:04 <isabela> we should think of a case where: 1. we have a new feature and the donation campaign banner or 2. the update note is there and the donation banner
19:13:15 <isabela> brade: probably
19:13:28 <arthuredelstein> Another thing I've been thinking about is having some kind of "Tor Project News" section from time to time.
19:13:42 <antonela> arthuredelstein: oh i like it
19:14:04 <antonela> i remember we talked with ooni people to introduce some news there, but maybe TPO ones?
19:14:09 <antonela> maybe for a 2.0 version tjo
19:14:10 <antonela> tho
19:14:11 <isabela> we need to think of that be translated to
19:14:17 <isabela> *too
19:14:19 <mcs> I like the news idea, or at least something to connect Tor Browser users to our community. We should make sure it loads quickly though.
19:14:22 <isabela> i mean not just a rss from the blog
19:14:37 <arthuredelstein> isabela: yes, I agree it would need to be translated
19:14:39 <isabela> cuz the blog psts are not translated
19:14:44 <isabela> *posts
19:14:45 <dmr> sorry, missed the start of this meeting (connection issue); would love to see any links shared for discussion
19:15:02 <antonela> i really like firefox's bottom bar which says things, but im sure they have a team working on those updates
19:15:16 <isabela> dmr: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/25695
19:15:21 <isabela> we are talking about this ticket
19:15:26 <antonela> because i click it often and changes weekly maybe
19:16:47 * antonela is taking notes
19:17:03 <arthuredelstein> Another thought was some kind of "share Tor Browser" link to encourage people to get their friends to download it.
19:17:20 <GeKo> what should it do?
19:17:27 <antonela> tweet? maybe?
19:17:32 <isabela> yeah, would that give them a text with a download link?
19:17:44 <antonela> it can be localizated also
19:17:44 <isabela> yeah
19:17:50 <isabela> but then is limited
19:17:50 <arthuredelstein> Yes, could be a tweet or facebook button (non-tracking :P)
19:17:58 <antonela> haha
19:18:06 <isabela> i would prefer no social media
19:18:07 <isabela> not sure
19:18:11 <mcs> Another thing to keep in mind is implementation complexity. I think I mentioned this last week with respect to the new feature onboarding (it is not clear to me if we will be able to use existing Firefox code or not).
19:18:13 <antonela> we should pick the right social media gigant
19:19:22 <arthuredelstein> I'm of course unhappy with the tracking social media does, but it is where people are :)
19:19:40 <isabela> but i am afraid that this might lead to leaking info from the user
19:19:46 <antonela> mcs: yes, i worked over this idea because was something we talked about, but yes, we need to see how dev effort it takes and if we can do it
19:19:53 <isabela> that might not be aware
19:20:15 <arthuredelstein> isabela: Yes, I think the main danger is they are admitting to using Tor Browser which could be bad for some people.
19:20:16 <isabela> (yes please devs! tell us if our ideas are too insande :)
19:20:21 <mcs> We can have several phases of implementation if necessar.
19:20:26 <mcs> -ry
19:20:30 <GeKo> +1
19:20:55 <isabela> *insane
19:21:44 <GeKo> and let#sleave social media out for now
19:21:51 <GeKo> *let's leave
19:21:53 <isabela> ok
19:22:00 <antonela> yep, i like the idea but is too risky for now
19:22:01 <dmr> agreed with leaving out social media
19:22:04 <GeKo> we should have this in a next iteration if at all
19:22:09 <mcs> Before I forget, one comment on the visual design is that to me the “Critical Message” area blends into the browser chrome a little. We should make sure it stands out so people do not overlook it.
19:22:32 <GeKo> at least i like to think about it more before committing to anything in this area
19:22:49 <arthuredelstein> definitely needs some careful thought about risks/benefits
19:22:51 <igt0> Question about the UI/UX framework. are we all happy about the what is new in the bottom? I mean the DDG search bar  should have priority about what is new?
19:23:33 <GeKo> reminds me of https://textslashplain.com/2017/01/14/the-line-of-death/ for those who have not seen it
19:23:33 <isabela> hmm
19:24:03 <isabela> GeKo: ! nice tx
19:24:06 <isabela> i havent seen it
19:24:15 <antonela> yes but is not the same
19:24:34 <isabela> igt0: that is a good point, i wonder if we should invert things
19:25:12 <antonela> mcs: maybe yes, we can think about some shadows or different use of colors to avoid that situation
19:25:13 <isabela> antonela: have you tried that ? and maybe we will need to pile a bunch of thing on the top of the other with that, for the case where we have donation banner plus new feature plus new release/update
19:25:42 <antonela> isa: yes, i have notes to work on that
19:25:46 <antonela> i mean donate + update
19:25:47 <isabela> cool
19:25:57 <isabela> but have things on the top instead of the bottom
19:25:58 <dmr> I think the new items at the bottom are not "eye catching" enough
19:26:06 <isabela> and push the search thing down when we have someething to say
19:26:19 <antonela> maybe the solution for outdated browsers is a full red page, i need to read all the related tickets before approach a solution to that
19:26:34 <isabela> but that will happen every time we have a new release
19:26:51 <dmr> alternatively, could have another "new here" size/shape widget near the top, saying there's new features + clicking it scrolls the page
19:27:06 <dmr> should be a different color, to draw attention to it
19:27:07 <isabela> antonela: the update work - is more about the flow too, not only the indication of update needed
19:27:15 <antonela> yes
19:27:16 <antonela> i know
19:27:19 <isabela> :)
19:27:25 <antonela> this is why im still reading ha
19:27:31 <isabela> hahaha
19:27:33 <isabela> gotcha
19:27:52 <mcs> We should talk more about the UX for updates. Mozilla has moved toward a more subtle UI when automated updates are working fine, although we may want to prompt users more prominently to restart to apply a downloaded update.
19:27:58 <antonela> dmr, igt0: the main idea is to have the bottom part above the fold
19:28:04 <mcs> (we meaning Tor Browser)
19:28:20 <antonela> mcs yes, i wanted to ask you if you can be the person who can help me with some question on that :)
19:28:28 <isabela> ok
19:28:30 <antonela> but i was about to ping you next week haha
19:29:14 <mcs> antonela: sure, I can help and brade too
19:29:22 <isabela> ok! 30min time - just fyi :)
19:29:34 <antonela> mcs: super thanks  :)
19:29:40 <isabela> wonder if antonela has enough to play more
19:30:03 <antonela> about this not, i'll iterate over the comments and make mobile approaches
19:30:11 <antonela> we can move to security settings aka slider
19:30:22 <isabela> is everyone cool with taht?
19:30:24 <isabela> *that
19:30:32 <igt0> about notification, I wonder if we could use web notification api, or the user will hate us. (or if it makes sense)
19:31:00 <igt0> (or even scary people)
19:31:06 <antonela> oh
19:31:12 <isabela> igt0: i think they wont hate us but again - they are used to it from other apps
19:31:21 <isabela> i do wonder if for us, if that is safe
19:31:28 <isabela> like is any leaking going on when doing that or something
19:32:00 <isabela> i dont think they will hate us cuz is not something we will do all the time
19:32:10 <isabela> only when updates are necessary and they should know that :) is for their safety
19:32:39 <antonela> i think notifications are made for chat bots or this kind of interactions, maybe the topbar doesn't work in that way
19:32:53 <antonela> but in terms of implementation, im not sure
19:33:26 <antonela> like, can i set up NO notification from about:tor? in that case, can users see our messages?
19:34:00 <antonela> igt0 maybe in mobile it is different
19:34:35 <antonela> anw, feel free to comment the ticket i'll continue working on it
19:35:00 <isabela> oki
19:35:09 <antonela> #25658
19:36:03 <antonela> i made a proposal last week which wasn't so successful so i kept back to think about icons
19:36:04 <GeKo> the closing circle should only be in two steps i think
19:36:09 <GeKo> you get nothing in default
19:36:18 <GeKo> the circle is half closed in "safer"
19:36:25 <GeKo> and fully closed in "safest
19:36:26 <GeKo> "
19:36:42 <antonela> well, but if you dont have nothing, looks like something is wrong or is missing
19:36:43 <GeKo> oh, and there is no "safe" state fwiw
19:36:48 <antonela> and we want to avoid that situation
19:36:49 <antonela> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/25658/25658%20-%203.png
19:36:54 <antonela> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/25658/25658%20-%204.png
19:36:57 <antonela> ^ just in case
19:37:21 <isabela> (safe is called 'standard')
19:37:39 <brade> I’m concerned that we don’t have enough pixels for the cool designs you have.  I believe icons in the toolbar are 16px high.
19:37:54 <GeKo> good point
19:38:25 <antonela> pixels at toolbar are 24px high
19:38:30 <brade> for this reason, I like the shield set from last week (outlined, half filled, filled)
19:38:55 <brade> antonela: I was looking at the CSS earlier
19:38:57 <GeKo> antonela: are you sure? across platforms?
19:39:19 <antonela> Firefox for Android icons are 20×20, with a bounding box of 24×24, according to Material Design specs. Firefox for iOS icons live on a 24×24 grid.
19:39:29 <antonela> https://design.firefox.com/photon/visuals/iconography.html
19:40:17 <brade> Andoid is probably taller due to touch size; desktop is 16x16
19:40:29 <antonela> im trying to work with real-size mockups just because this, most of the options should work at really small sizes
19:41:16 <GeKo> good, just a thing to be aware of
19:41:30 <antonela> yep
19:41:47 <dmr> I'm a bit concerned that the contrast difference is too little for the "Standard" vs. "Safest" rings
19:41:50 <meejah> oh, neat icons! (FWIW I prefer the "04" one .. looks less like a "spinner that's not doing its thing")
19:43:03 <GeKo> antonela: i wonder if one could argue "you are getting alrady the lock in the standard setting, others don't even have that"
19:43:08 <isabela> i like the option A with the rings
19:43:17 <GeKo> ("others" in the sense of other browsers)
19:43:39 <arthuredelstein> I think I'm still partial to the shield icons. I tend to think of a padlock as "protecting my belongings" while a shield is "protecting me". I don't usually lock myself in a room with a padlock :)
19:43:40 <GeKo> and then we could do the safer and safest thing with a closing circle or rings
19:44:21 <GeKo> yes, i am a fan of some shield variant to
19:44:22 <brade> I agree with Arthur.  I like the shield better for protection
19:44:25 <antonela> GeKo: is like how this feature is explained: you have a great default settings, but we can do more adding this, and this
19:44:28 <mcs> I like the shield designs from last week better as well, but if we use “lock plus rings” keep it simple (as GeKo suggests).
19:44:34 <isabela> GeKo: what about the rings around it (option A) on the other image
19:44:54 <kevun> I like option A with a shield instead of a padlock
19:45:19 <GeKo> isabela: yes, option A is better than B i think
19:45:25 <antonela> shield vs padlock is like privacy vs security
19:45:30 <brade> isabela: I don’t think you can get a nice lock within two rings in 16x16 but maybe antonela can work a miracle
19:45:32 <antonela> limits are diffuse
19:45:51 <GeKo> antonela: google is using a shield for both iirc
19:45:58 <isabela> brade: hehe :)
19:46:01 <GeKo> with an extra icon within
19:46:05 <GeKo> to differentite
19:46:06 <antonela> i showed the screenshots last week
19:46:11 <antonela> is like a shield + lock for security
19:46:16 <GeKo> *differentiate
19:46:16 <antonela> shield + user for privacy
19:46:19 <GeKo> yes
19:46:30 <GeKo> so the shield stands for "protection"
19:46:42 <GeKo> and i think we should jump on that train
19:46:58 <isabela> hmm
19:46:58 <antonela> also, if you are curious, i included brave's settings screenshots for privsec settings
19:47:07 <antonela> on the ticket attachments
19:48:31 <antonela> the filling-a-shield idea wasnt bad, but the first state is empty and it does not represent "default" security
19:48:32 <antonela> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/25658/25658-exploration%202.png
19:48:39 <antonela> some previous trials there ^
19:48:53 <dmr> I also like the shield better, for "protection", and also to differentiate it from the other lock that tends to be displayed on the toolbar area (TLS)
19:49:23 <sysrqb> Brave confuses privacy and security on that tab
19:49:26 <antonela> ahha
19:49:28 <brade> antonela: It is still a shield in the default case
19:49:29 <antonela> like users :)
19:49:42 <antonela> sysrqb: because maybe, for users, both things means protection
19:49:44 <GeKo> antonela: i still wonder whether we get away with just showing the shield in standard mode
19:49:50 <GeKo> what brade said
19:49:51 <meejah> I like the three-keyholes one (or variations on that: "more shields is better", right?)
19:49:55 <GeKo> and then you get a shiled +1
19:49:59 <GeKo> *shield
19:50:00 <sysrqb> yeah :(
19:50:16 <GeKo> and finally a shield +2 with fire resistance
19:50:54 <antonela> i can continue working around this idea -> https://share.riseup.net/#iEm24jGMgHLQLe9sdxG7Pw
19:50:55 * GeKo gets suddenly reminded at his active dnd time
19:51:07 <sysrqb> ha
19:51:21 <kevun> In the comments on the ticket someone pointed out that some users may not understand that there's meant to be more than one shield, or more than one lock, etc.
19:51:46 <antonela> super good comments at the ticket btw
19:51:47 <isabela> if you go to google images and do a search for 'privacy' on images tab you see tons of locks
19:51:53 <sysrqb> right, the onboarding should tel the users about the different ptions
19:51:57 <sysrqb> options, too
19:51:57 <isabela> if you do another for 'security' you see tons of shields
19:51:58 * dmr glances through the comments
19:52:24 <arthuredelstein> interesting, brave also calls it a "shield". That's actually a pretty good word for the concept of what the security slider is doing at higher levels.
19:52:28 <meejah> kevun: good point, that's what I like about the "rings" ones (you can see some arn't full)
19:52:40 <kevun> meejah: yeah, agreed.
19:52:47 <antonela> arthuredelstein : they have an strong concept: up shield / down shield
19:52:54 <antonela> arthuredelstein: is good
19:53:19 <antonela> and they have 2 options, and they have granular settings  (like js) on advanced
19:53:38 <isabela> (the google image search dont need to drive our decision but is a way to see what most ppl are doing)
19:53:46 <antonela> anw, i found it after making last week proposal ha
19:54:07 <antonela> isa is Brave user and she never thought that the shield at the top was for that, for example
19:54:20 <isabela> yep!
19:54:25 <antonela> like, happens in the best families :)
19:54:29 <isabela> i thought it was just their logo
19:54:38 <GeKo> wait you are not using tor browser!1!! ?
19:54:38 <isabela> but they never told me about it either!
19:54:42 <isabela> like no onboarding
19:54:42 <sysrqb> yeah, that's not obvious
19:54:48 <isabela> GeKo: hahaha i use 20k browsers
19:54:56 <antonela> they included a color animation now i think
19:55:01 <antonela> i have all the browsers open haha
19:55:05 <isabela> :)
19:55:06 <GeKo> :)
19:55:10 <antonela> containers? what's that? hahaha
19:55:45 <antonela> i think people like shields here
19:55:51 <antonela> i can continue working on it
19:55:58 <isabela> (/me decides to go with the flow on the shields vs padlock :)
19:56:08 <antonela> yes
19:56:14 <antonela> we talked about that last week too
19:56:16 <isabela> i think that we will teach people
19:56:27 <dmr> antonela, isabela: I got that Brave's logo *is* a shield, but if I saw that logo randomly, I wouldn't associate it with protection (because it is their logo)
19:56:35 <dmr> here, I think we won't be confusing users with a plain shield
19:56:43 <sysrqb> isabela: maybe ask during user testing?
19:56:46 <arthuredelstein> Just a dumb idea -- what about a number inside the icon to indicate security level (1, 2, or 3)
19:56:57 <isabela> sysrqb: aha! we could do a survey too
19:57:04 <antonela> yes, someone commented it arthur
19:57:09 <sysrqb> yeah! that :)
19:57:09 <isabela> we have limesurvey on .onion for this type of things
19:57:10 <antonela> which is the most secure? the 1 or the 3?
19:57:13 <arthuredelstein> oops
19:57:26 <antonela> i dont know, maybe it is the solution
19:57:48 <antonela> as you can see, i dont have *the* solution ha, is better if we think together about it
19:57:55 <igt0> +1 for survey.
19:58:08 <antonela> which options you would like to test?
19:58:23 <antonela> or privacy vs security associated with locks or shields
19:58:33 <isabela> we can do one where we ask which symbol you associate more with privacy (have both) and another one that shows the same images but the question asks them which they will associate with security
19:58:43 <antonela> yes
19:59:10 <kevun> +1 for survey. Could also be interesting to see how this changes across cultures, but that could be overkill.
19:59:32 <isabela> and hard if we do this like tweeting the .onion survey link
19:59:37 <isabela> not a target survey
19:59:40 <isabela> but open in the wild
19:59:41 <kevun> Indeed
19:59:46 <antonela> wondering if google or brave did it
19:59:49 * GeKo points isa to her next meeting
19:59:54 <isabela> !!!!!!!!
19:59:56 <sysrqb> heh
20:00:07 <sysrqb> kevun: google almost certainly did user testing :/
20:00:12 <dmr> word connotation is hard. "privacy", "security", "protection", "safety", ... all have linguistic biases (and changes in different languages)
20:00:13 <isabela> antonela: they probably did - google for sure
20:00:24 <antonela> we read papers about padlock indicators but for settings, idk
20:00:57 <sysrqb> oh, err, antonela: 'google almost certainly did user testing :/'
20:01:04 <sysrqb> sorry kevun  :)
20:01:31 <kevun> No problem!
20:01:46 <sysrqb> anything else we shoulld discuss today/now?
20:02:13 <antonela> i dont think so, feel free to comment the ticket, i'll be working on them  :)
20:02:16 <isabela> antonela: yeah, i did my lame 'google image serach' for those words and there is where i got the shield == security / padlock == privacy
20:02:30 <isabela> but that is a lame way to look at what ppl associate one thing to another
20:03:09 <antonela> yep
20:03:31 <isabela> hmm
20:03:35 <isabela> how we conduct the survey tho
20:03:39 <isabela> should we just tweet it?
20:03:49 <isabela> or i can use my network of 'testers' and ask them
20:04:17 <antonela> yes we can
20:04:29 <brade> will the survey show icons in a browser context or just words (abstract)?
20:04:35 <isabela> :) i have ppl in latam africa and south asia / we can also send it to tor-talk or something
20:04:52 <isabela> brade: icons and words / no browser context i think
20:05:05 <brade> isabela: that seems less useful
20:05:16 <igt0> brade, i think it would be like the one made in: https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/soups2016/soups2016-paper-porter-felt.pdf
20:05:20 <isabela> you think we shoud have a mock of the browser
20:05:30 <brade> isabela: yes
20:05:54 <isabela> i was thinking of showing both icons and ask ' which icon you think is associated with privacy
20:06:47 <antonela> igt0 those paper has some responses
20:06:47 <igt0> isabela, maybe with different colors as well
20:06:52 <antonela> sorry, answers
20:07:44 <antonela> i remember the first proposal i did for this ticket, at the start at the month, with a shield included colors
20:07:53 <brade> igt0: just skimming but it sounds like they were working from a browser screen shot
20:11:08 <antonela> indeed, the 'security' icon ended being a lock
20:13:17 <dmr> brade, igt0: looks like they actually didn't give a screenshot in the survey; ref 6.1 Questions + Appendix C.1
20:13:22 * isabela needs to be on this other meeting sorry (will end the bot when this meeting ends)
20:13:38 <dmr> instead looks like they just presented two icons and said "Imagine [...]"
20:15:06 <dmr> oh, erm... they also had some screenshots; see 7.2 and Appendix C.2
20:15:55 <dmr> e.g. "If you saw this browser page, how safe would you feel about the current website?"
20:16:45 <mcs> We might learn something interesting from a survey, but I still think the shield works better when trying to show 3 different levels of protection.
20:16:58 <dmr> mcs: I agree
20:17:12 <mcs> Especially when the icon size is small. It is important for users to be able to tell at a glance what the setting is.
20:17:52 <mcs> Who would’ve thought this would be such a difficult problem :) ?
20:18:20 <antonela> mcs: :)
20:18:35 <dmr> I also would like to reiterate the potential to overload the "lock" icon. Let's not ignore that users have been taught to "look for the lock" as an indication that a connection is secure. The toolbar area would thus have two potential locks: TLS-security lock (sometimes visible) + Tor Security Slider lock (always visible).
20:18:37 <antonela> think about a onion icon working on a 1:1 radio container :)
20:19:09 <dmr> it would be unfortunate for a user to "look for the lock", see the Tor Security Slider lock, and think that means their connection is secure and they can enter e.g. credit-card info
20:19:43 <brade> antonela: what is a 1:1 radio container?
20:20:16 <antonela> brade: im drawing #25763 :)
20:21:07 <antonela> and trying to adjust an onion icon that 1) can work on small sizes such as 16x16 px 2) this icon ideally may fits in a squared container
20:21:41 <antonela> brade: seems easy, but is tricky
20:22:10 <brade> antonela: I can’t do it but I admire those who can!
20:22:26 <antonela> brade: :)
20:22:35 <mcs> So what are the next steps for the security indicator design?
20:23:14 <antonela> on my side, i'll back to the shield icon and talk with isabela about the survey thing
20:24:21 <mcs> That sounds good to me. I think the design overall is great; we just need a good icon set!
20:26:00 <antonela> mcs: we are working on that!
20:26:05 <antonela> :)
20:26:34 <arthuredelstein> awesome work antonela!
20:26:47 <sysrqb> +1 :)
20:27:33 <antonela> oh thanks i really like to work for browser :) is so challenging but im sure will improve peoples experiences
20:27:37 <antonela> *people
20:28:35 <sysrqb> yup
20:30:38 <kevun> Awesome stuff!
20:35:15 <igt0> btw, did we end the meeting? :)
20:36:02 * dmr feels that we've effectively ended the meeting
20:36:16 <brade> I think we need isabela to stop the bot
20:50:14 <isabela> #endmeeting