On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 11:04 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]
That would seem oddly specific and easily falsifiable. Which is probably why no one else has pointed out the odd wording.
Or people grumble silently.
Reasonable but probably not worth the hassle to figure out the details. Though I’d be tempted to formalize the existing behavior and just add an optional field after password to hold a description. If we do ever extend off the end to specify yet more fields we’d make all the preceding optional fields mandatory.
I like that idea.
