Add shortcut list

[chimp1984]

Should be merged after #3694 (not hard requirement though)

[julianknutsen]

NIT and questions

[freimair]

ahm I am not sure if I got your intentions but that is what caught my attention:

• in AccountView pressing ... + n creates a new refund agent tab. Yet, the text says arbitrator.
• there is no code to create a new arbitrator-tab, can we get rid of the remnants?

It seems there is some tangling up of "arbitrator" and "refund agent". We should clear that up to avoid confusion.

minor stuff:

• Navigate to account and click: {0} shouldn't it be "press" instead of "click"

[ripcurlx]

It seems there is some tangling up of "arbitrator" and "refund agent". We should clear that up to avoid confusion.

Atm we used in all user facing views arbitrator instead of refund agent to reduce unnecessary concerns when we switched to the new trade protocol.
If someone tries to register an arbitrator (new refund agent) we labeled it refund agent to make it clearer to the new refund agents that they are in the correct registration view. So I don't think it is a good idea to change the label to arbitrator now to prevent confusion for the real refund agents.
I think maybe in a couple of releases when we get rid of most of the legacy arbitrator parts there might be the point also to rename the refund agents.

• Navigate to account and click: {0} shouldn't it be "press" instead of "click"

NIT - Yes it would be good to be consistent in this view if we want to use click or press.

[chimp1984]

@freimair

refund agent vs. arbitrator

We use refundAgent in the domain (code) but left arbitrator as the term for users (UI). There are some discussions for a better term, but so far arbitrator (UI) is refund agent and old arbitrator is "legacy arbitrator".

click

Will change it.

[freimair]

• there is no code to create a new arbitrator-tab, can we get rid of the remnants?

what about dead code?

but so far arbitrator (UI) is refund agent and old arbitrator is "legacy arbitrator".

seems reasonable. however, why is the refund agent tab then titled "refund agend registration"?

[chimp1984]

• there is no code to create a new arbitrator-tab, can we get rid of the remnants?

what about dead code?

Removing the legacy arbitator domain is a bit of a bigger task. There might be some usage in messages, so simply deletion will not be enough.

but so far arbitrator (UI) is refund agent and old arbitrator is "legacy arbitrator".

seems reasonable. however, why is the refund agent tab then titled "refund agend registration"?

"Arbitrator" is for users. "refund agend registration" is for refund agents to make it more clear and to avoid confusion for the refund agent.

[chimp1984]

@freimair Can you review again?

[freimair]

I am stepping back from reviewing this.

First, IMO, if we remove the short-cut to even trigger a "legacy arbitrator" tab, the code remnants should be removed. This is dead code. If we do not remove it right away, it might stay there until a newcomer asks about what that is.

Second, I do not like the dual vocabulary. It is only confusing.

I am stepping back from reviewing this.

[chimp1984]

@freimair I only wanted to add a small feature as it is annoying to look up the shortcuts in the code each time one needs them. It was not intended to change existing naming schemes (refund agent vs. arbitrator) as there is anyway some discussion going on for a better term. As well it would be far beyond the scope of that PR to remove the domain code of legacy arbitration which carries also some risks and will require lots of testing with backward compatibility. As the risk/effort/benefit ration is pretty bad for that effort I also do not have intention to work on that any time soon. Too much other important stuff waiting to get implemented...

I understand that this discussion here becomes too much of an effort and I am ok with closing that PR as well. Not such an important feature to justify to burn so much time for reviewers and author.

[sqrrm]

I will take a look at this as I want the short cut list added (too annoying looking through the code indeed)

[ripcurlx]

ACK

Tested on Regtest and everything is working as expected.