Question Changes to privacy logic

In the privacy settings, there is an option to disable the privacy checks entirely.

If you select "show living individuals -> show to public", then all privacy checks are disabled.

The idea is that if your tree only contains public information, you can improve performance by skipping the privacy checks.

There is a proposal to change this - github.com/fisharebest/webtrees/pull/5426

This PR wants us to respect inline RESN values when the webtrees privacy logic is disabled.

I probably wouldn't accept this PR as it stands, but could add it as a third option

1) no privacy checks
2) just RESN
3) full webtrees privacy logic

Any thoughts on this?

Interesting. Despite 25years of using webtrees/pgv I had never considered using such an option - until quite recently. Of late I have been thinking about having two trees; one for members and one for visitors. The latter would have all living people removed, and therefore no privacy required (nor any editing features). I can't immediately think of any instance where I would use a hybrid option (using RESN) but I do agree it should be possible. Go with your three-stage option.

Initial thoughts:

- The text around "show living individuals to members/visitors" does not mention what if extra restrictions are present.
- In my view, what to do with restrictions is a separate config option, and respecting restrictions is imho a good default value.
- It's always better to hide things by surprise than to show things by surprise.
- What about facts with restrictions?
- Do you show the restriction fact itself to visitors?

For me, your concept with three options sounds very good. I would like that.
I'm offering several test trees (for example, to check GEDCOM options). Then it makes no sense to enter "DEAT = y" so that every test person is already dead. It is easier to declare that no privacy checks are necessary for such a test tree.
But for me, "show living individuals -> show to public" is a bit misleading wording for the "no privacy checks" option.

Q1: Is this about visitors only?

fisharebest wrote:

…
1) no privacy checks
2) just RESN
3) full webtrees privacy logic

Q2: Does 3 mean respecting RESN and hiding living individuals? Then I‘d definitely support this.

Q3: Would a forth option to ignore RESN and hide living individuals make sense?

This could be implemented with 3 checkboxes as

[] No restrictions for visitors.
[] Apply restrictions to visitors:
> [] Hide data restricted by a RESN tag.
> [] Hide living individuals.

 

I think for me it would be interesting to have the access restrictions set before the individual is retrieved for displayed rather than dynamically each time they are retrieved!

This would require two things,
1) When a new individual is saved and updated that their data is reviewed against the rules for display and set their restriction!
2) A utility that can be run on all individuals against the rules for display and set their restriction!  This could also be run automatically when the rules change!

Fact level restrictions would still be a manual process!