(Android) Date format in certificate viewer are not consistent with other parts & date are not always readable |
|||||||||||
Issue descriptionSteps to reproduce the problem: 1. open https page 2. go into certificate viewer What is the expected behavior? Dates are displayed like in other browser parts + they're clear What went wrong? There is taken device locale and for example you can see 1/4/17 (is it 4th Jan or 1st April ?) Did this work before? No Chrome version: 55 Channel: stable OS Version: 6 Flash Version:
,
Jan 19 2017
palmer: Could you see if this is intended or not? The manual import of java.text.DateFormat seems like WAI.
,
Jan 19 2017
I'll defer to Team-Security-UX.
,
Jan 19 2017
lgarron@, can you take a look?
,
Jan 19 2017
,
Jan 23 2017
hi, friendly ping -> any update here?
,
Jan 30 2017
hi, can I ask for decision here ?
,
Jan 31 2017
I'm happy with https://codereview.chromium.org/2645753002/ but I'm not a reviewer. rsleevi@: Are there any historical considerations for this change, or can we go ahead and land marcin@'s change?
,
Jan 31 2017
,
Jan 31 2017
I'd like to ask you run this past UI leads first. The previous format was intentional (at the time). I'd be concerned about the shift to expanded strings, and for how we consider this across other platforms.
,
Jan 31 2017
As a gut reaction - the screenshot from #1 seems clear to me. rolfe@, WDYT?
,
Jan 31 2017
+maxwalker as primary security designer these days (just FYI) Looks OK to me as well. In looking at where we reference dates throughout the UI (history, downloads, web pages like Privacy notice and Sync), we tend to spell out the month in full (January 31, 2017) so that would be my only recommendation there, if you're not tight on space.
,
Jan 31 2017
+maxwalker for real : )
,
Jan 31 2017
> Looks OK to me as well. In looking at where we reference > dates throughout the UI (history, downloads, web pages like > Privacy notice and Sync), we tend to spell out the > month in full (January 31, 2017) so that would > be my only recommendation there, if you're not tight on space. We have short version as well (for example in the info about offline version)
,
Jan 31 2017
You're right! I don't know why that choice was made. Short-form is fine for now (and maxwalker@ you can advise on changes as things evolve.)
,
Jan 31 2017
> You're right! I don't know why that choice was made. > Short-form is fine for now (and maxwalker@ you > can advise on changes as things evolve.) thx, can somebody lgtm patch now ?
,
Jan 31 2017
,
Feb 1 2017
Bug can be closed -> patch was submitted
,
Feb 10 2017
For some reason, the commit message to https://codereview.chromium.org/2645753002/ was never attached to this bug. Closing. |
|||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||
Comment 1 by mar...@mwiacek.com
, Jan 19 2017197 KB
197 KB View Download