Skip to content

[WIP] Change wording of voters #3326

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 26, 2013
Merged

[WIP] Change wording of voters #3326

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions cookbook/security/voters.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -40,12 +40,12 @@ The ``vote()`` method must implement the business logic that verifies whether
or not the user is granted access. This method must return one of the following
values:

* ``VoterInterface::ACCESS_GRANTED``: The user is allowed to access the application
* ``VoterInterface::ACCESS_GRANTED``: The user is allowed to access something
* ``VoterInterface::ACCESS_ABSTAIN``: The voter cannot decide if the user is granted or not
* ``VoterInterface::ACCESS_DENIED``: The user is not allowed to access the application
* ``VoterInterface::ACCESS_DENIED``: The user is not allowed to access something
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not sure with these play of words and clarifications later

would resource be better?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe the base phrasing would be something like Asked authorization will be refused by this voter. Stressing that we're dealing with a specific question, and that other Voters may decide, is important.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think resource is better than something.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 for @romaricdrigon proposal


In this example, you'll check if the user's IP address matches against a list of
blacklisted addresses. If the user's IP is blacklisted, you'll return
blacklisted addresses and "something" will be the application. If the user's IP is blacklisted, you'll return
``VoterInterface::ACCESS_DENIED``, otherwise you'll return
``VoterInterface::ACCESS_ABSTAIN`` as this voter's purpose is only to deny
access, not to grant access.
Expand Down