Skip to content

LG-11355: IPP Opt-in Choices#9452

Merged
allthesignals merged 58 commits intomainfrom
wmg/11355-new-page
Nov 6, 2023
Merged

LG-11355: IPP Opt-in Choices#9452
allthesignals merged 58 commits intomainfrom
wmg/11355-new-page

Conversation

@allthesignals
Copy link
Contributor

@allthesignals allthesignals commented Oct 25, 2023

🎫 Ticket

🛠 Summary of changes

Draft PR to add the IPP opt-in page.

If in_person_proofing_opt_in_enabled is on, direct from the agreement page to the proofing method selection page (/how-to-verify)

📜 Testing Plan

N/A

👀 Screenshots

IRL:
en
image

es
image

fr
image

Design spec:
image

Comment on lines 35 to 36
if IdentityConfig.store.in_person_proofing_opt_in_option
redirect_to idv_how_to_verify_url
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It makes a lot of sense to branch off this new page from the Agreement page! Lmk if you want to pair on any of this - setting up an A/B test, wrangling changes to the flow, etc.

Copy link
Contributor

@sheldon-b sheldon-b left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looking good! Left a few comments I expect are already on your to-do list

Copy link
Contributor

@n1zyy n1zyy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm still getting used to the team's norms so I'm not sure if I should leave an approval just yet, but this looks great to me!

I spotted two possible things that are incredibly minor; I mentioned them in case you end up pushing another revision and agree with the comments, but please feel free to ignore them as well.

text_message: Enviamos un mensaje a su teléfono
upload_from_computer: Continuar en esta computadora
upload_from_phone: Utilice su teléfono para tomar las fotos
verify_at_post_office: Verifique su identidad en una Oficina de Correos
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh gosh I feel bad only finding ridiculously trivial things (I guess that's because this looks great?), but it looks like @gina-yamada's PR moves "Oficina de Correos" to lowercase. Was that part of an official change we want to duplicate here?

(Also, I'm not actually trying to review copy changes in other languages at all; my eyes just happened to notice this one for some reason.)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Welll hmm. @carmenrosalop noticed that I had the English version lowercased and that it needed to be capitalized. I believe these translations were already provided with the term capitalized. I'll defer to Carmen on this!

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catch! Yes, Carmen and I just discussed this in my PR because I also had the C capitalized. If you do a global search for Post Office in Spanish, they are all lower case.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@allthesignals @gina-yamada Hey! Two days ago we were debating whether we should keep the Spanish and French version of Post Office in upper case, and we looked more into it and on the USPS website, the translation to Spanish shows it with lowercase. So we're going to follow that approach for French and Spanish of keeping the translation of Post Office lower case.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, updated, but can @gina-yamada give it a once over for me?

Good eye, @n1zyy!

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes! Reviewing it now. I will comment when I am finished.

Co-authored-by: Matt Wagner <mattwagner@navapbc.com>
@n1zyy
Copy link
Contributor

n1zyy commented Nov 3, 2023 via email

@gina-yamada
Copy link
Contributor

gina-yamada commented Nov 6, 2023

@allthesignals The page looks great! Here are some notes from my testing...

When in_person_proofing_opt_in_enabled = true

⛔ Summary of changes (in the PR description above) should be changed from in_person_proofing_opt_in_option to in_person_proofing_opt_in_enabled.
⛔ Sentence "You have the option to verify your identity online, or in person at a participating Post Office" should have a period. (The mocks have a period.) Looks like you got the period in Spanish and French- so just English needs to be updated.
⛔ You are missing the Cancel link at the bottom of the page
❓Should the view have the step indicator at the top? The mocks do not show it but wanted to call it out as it is on pages both before and after. I understand the steps might change depending on the flow to so maybe intentional not to have it on this particular page.
Screenshot 2023-11-06 at 9 46 42 AM
❓ Consider displaying a 404 for the view if the flag is off. If we turn on flag- and someone bookmarks or tries to visit that URL again- might be nice.
✅ Help Center links are working as expected
✅ Design & content matches mocks (except for missing period mentioned above)
✅ Hitting Continue with nothing selected
✅ Navigation is working as expected: verify/agreement directs to /verify/how_to_verify [pick on-line] to verify/hybrid_handoff
✅ Navigation is working as expected: verify/agreement directs to /verify/how_to_verify [pick post office] to /verify/hybrid_handoff
✅ Observed idv_doc_auth_how_to_verify_submitted & idv_doc_auth_how_to_verify_submitted events in logs
✅ Tests coverage when flag is off and on

When in_person_proofing_opt_in_enabled = false

✅ Navigation is working as expected: /verify/agreement directs to /verify/hybrid_handoff
✅ Typing /verify/how_to_verify in the url does direct me to the page and I stay where I am at in the flow
✅ Clicking Cancel and then No, continue goes back to verify/hybrid_handoff as I'd expect
✅ Working as I'd expect when flag is off

Just a few minor comments, nothing blocking IMO. If we decide more work on cancel or step nav- maybe just get this in and open a new tickets. If you make changes and/or tickets to handle others- let me know and I will approve.


before_action :confirm_step_allowed

check_or_render_not_found -> { self.class.enabled? }
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not seeing a not found page when I type in the url. We displayed the 404 view when we worked on the non-FSM views. I think it is a good idea. I am not sure this is working.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmmmm. Good eye. Thanks.

@allthesignals
Copy link
Contributor Author

⛔ You are missing the Cancel link at the bottom of the page

I think @sheldon-b will add this in a follow-up PR? This feature depends on the particulars of routing so I skipped it.

end
end

it 'displays expected content and requires a choice' do
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What do you think about adding another context block and moving this it block inside?
context 'opt-in ipp is turned on' do

Copy link
Contributor

@sheldon-b sheldon-b left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good! With and without the flag -- routing behaves as I expect. So when the feature flag is turned off it skips the new page. With the feature flag turned on it shows the new page and choosing either option proceeds to remote proofing (which is what we want for this ticket -- conditional routing will come next)

Responsiveness looks right using dev tools

One small request to update the routing to match the previous behavior when the user chooses remote proofing

Co-authored-by: Sheldon Bachstein <sheldon.bachstein@gsa.gov>
@allthesignals allthesignals merged commit bf6b8b3 into main Nov 6, 2023
@allthesignals allthesignals deleted the wmg/11355-new-page branch November 6, 2023 18:49
@matthinz matthinz mentioned this pull request Nov 6, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm seeing some flakey test failures from this file on an unrelated pull request. Can you take a look @allthesignals ?

https://gitlab.login.gov/lg/identity-idp/-/jobs/850239

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants