I think this would be something interesting to study. Most youtube
celebrities refer to themselves by their username. Having a separate name
field might not be serving a use case for anything or anyone.
On Jan 24, 2014 10:21 PM, "Andrew Richardson" <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> In views/user/profile.js:
>
> > +            summary: 'Update user profile'
> > +        },
> > +        validation: {
> > +            _user: {
> > +                description: 'User (ID or username slug)',
> > +                isRequired: true
> > +            },
> > +            email: {
> > +                description: 'New user email',
> > +                isEmail: true,
> > +                isRequired: false,
> > +            },
> > +            username: {
> > +                description: 'New username',
> > +                isRequired: false,
> > +            }
>
> No, users have unique IDs generated on creation. But I see your point. I
> suppose the display name could be (for example) someone's name, whereas the
> username / email would be the account's public identifier - akin to how
> Twitter has a username, email, and real name associated with an account,
> using the real name as the display name, but still allowing users to edit
> all of those fields.
>
> --
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/cvan/galaxy-api/pull/50/files#r9170399>
> .
>