On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:01:41AM -0600, Clint Savage wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I'm not actually sure, here's the app we're using: > > > > http://code.google.com/p/tgcaptcha/ > > > > It's a pretty easy change to start using Vanasco-Dowty but it gets tricky. > > neither one is particularly easy to read (which I guess is the point) > > > > -Mike > > Actually the Vanasco-Dowty is *much* easier to read (from what I see > on their google code page). I can read the McDermott CAPTCHA, but it > takes my eyes more effort and I had to squint a little. This is just > my experience, but I think the Vanasco-Dowty would be a good > compromise. > Bodhi switched from Vanasco-Dowty to McDermott because Vanasco-Dowty was too hard for people to use. I remember playing with it and I think the issue was that Vanasco-Dowty is much harder to figure out uppercase and lowercase than McDermott. Note that that's not something you realize by reading the documentation -- that's only something you realize by having your captcha rejected because you typed "CIKLOPSUVWXZ" instead of "ciklopsuvwxz". I'd love to see someone create a new captcha algorithm that was easier to use. I'd work on it myself but I don't know what a computer can or cannot read. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgp1Gl8qsTEWU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-websites-list mailing list Fedora-websites-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-websites-list
