It’s useful to be able to see what the email or text message looks like,
especially if you’ve sent it with a test API key (so it isn’t in your
inbox or on your phone). We already have the page for this, so we just
need to link to it.
Anyone choosing ‘NHS’ for their organisation type gets should get the
NHS branding. We don’t want to hard-code an ID for NHS branding anywhere
because it won’t be consistent between environments.
So instead we can say that anyone who chooses ‘NHS’ as their
organisation type should get whatever branding has `nhs.uk` as its
domain.
This allows us to easily manage the branding the same way we do other
brands, but gives us the efficiency of having it auto applied.
So that:
- we can see when a brand should be getting used as a default but isn’t
- we’re careful updating brands which will get auto-applied to new
services
When a user creates a service we can take a pretty good guess at what
organisation they’re from.
For many organisations, especially local councils, GOV.UK branding is
not appropriate for their service. But right now every service:
- gets created with GOV.UK branding
- has to ask us to change it, even if they’ve already done so for other
services they run
This commit starts using the `domain` field on the email branding table
to lookup what email branding to assign to a service automatically,
where we’re sure there’s a sensible default.
When saving an email branding it’s possible we might not enter the
canonical domain for an organisation into the domain field. Because
we’re going to use the canonical domain to look up the brandings this
will cause a mismatch.
Rather than validate this and show an error, let’s just save the correct
thing instead. From the user’s perspective this means everything will
just work (ie a user with a given email address will automatically get
the right branding for their organisation).
We should make sure we’re not putting typos in the branding list. We can
validate what gets entered here against our known list of public-sector
domains.
Because we alias domains (eg `foo.gsi.gov.uk` to `foo.gov.uk`, or where
a local council has multiple domains) it could be hard to look up a
brand (which has one domain field).
Therefore we need a way of getting the canonical domain from a user’s
email address, which we can later use to look up their branding.
There’s something that feels a bit off about not being able to see the
name of the currently-selected branding when you land on the page.
Putting it at the top also means that you can easily switch back to it
if you change your mind.
If we’re going to be referring to email branding as part of the service
creation journey then we should make sure it doesn’t slow things down
too much by adding an extra API call. Caching things in Redis is a way
of avoiding unneeded API calls.
To correspond with us dropping this column from the database.
Remove the attribute from the model gives us more confidence that it’s
not being used (because it will raise exceptions in any tests that refer
to it).
We sometimes have to do this over support tickets as part of the go-live
process; now we’re directing people to add a sender (as part of the task
list) we can explain what it is in context.
Since GDPR came into effect it’s less clear about whether we can
contact teams for user research purposes.
If we make people opt-in (or not) we know we’re safe to contact them (or
not).
Since we mostly care about how services are using Notify for real (ie
live services) or services that are considering adopting it (ie those
who have contacted us with a question) it feels like the go-live process
is the most appropriate place to collect this consent.
Now that we’re a more mature platform we don’t care so much about the
load that one service might put on our platform.
We do care about intended volumes for two reasons:
- modelling the benefits that services get from using Notify
- managing stocks of envelopes (while our letter volumes are small
enough that they could be skewed by one new service)
Changing to the ‘how many per year’ question also has the benefit of
mapping directly to the data we store in the ‘beta partners’
spreadsheet.
Currently we keep track of live services in the ‘beta partners’
spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JYhE5sJaOJUVMPPDenO2eKqElC75Rygxb1_2mpRKy98/edit#gid=503930061
Every time a service goes live we need to enter some data into the
spreadsheet about that service. Most of that data is copied from the
request to go live ticket.
This commit adds a line to the ticket with all the data needed by the
spreadsheet. It’s in the same order as in the spreadsheet, and it’s
tab-delimted so it should paste right on in there.
This is just the pricing page, we'll sort the pricing table etc separately...
W're removing non-crown pricing as we won't be charged differently any more. But we will retain the concept of non-crown as we may change differently ourselves in the future.
Setting the branding_style to 'None' causes the
API to remove the email_branding field from a
service model. The branding request page
controller was depending on that value being
to present get the brand type.
The email preview page (used in an iframe on
various pages) wasn't able to recognise a
branding_style of 'None', causing a blank page to
render.
We often check that a service has an appropriate text message sender as
a condition of them going live. We don’t mention this anywhere.
The services for whom GOVUK is definitely not an appropriate sender are
those in local government. As we have more of these teams starting to
use Notify, we should streamline the process by making this check
automated.
This commit adds that check, for teams who:
- have text message templates
- have self-declared as NHS or local government
We’ve found a significant property of users (about 25%) who request to
go live aren’t completing all the items on the checklist.
In 1 of 6 (17%) of the usability testing sessions we did on this process
we saw someone skip straight past the checklist page because of big
green button syndrome. While 1 in 6 people would normally be a small
number[1] in the context of a usability testing session, it’s enough to
cause a big workload for our team (assuming it is the sole cause of
people not completing the items on the checklist).
The initial reason for using the tick cross pattern for the checklist
was:
- it was coherent with the rest of Notify
- the task list pattern didn’t have a way of showing that something
still needed doing – it put more visual emphasis on the things
the user had already done
There’s been some interesting discussion on the GOV.UK Design System
backlog about users failing to complete items in the task list. A few
people have tried different patterns for communicating that items in the
task list still need ‘completing’.
So this commit:
- adds a task list pattern
- uses the task list pattern for the request to go live checklist
The task list is adapted from the one in the design system in that:
- the ‘completed’ label has a black, not blue background (because Notify
often uses blocks of blue to indicate something that’s clickable)
- it adds an explicit ‘not complete’ label which is visually not
filled in (sort of how ticked/unticket radio buttons work)
1. With the caveat that looking only at task completion, or quantifying
qualitative not good practices and the intention here is to show that
the numbers are close enough to say that they could be symptomatic of
the same problem. Leisa Reichelt’s Mind the Product talk is good on
this https://vimeo.com/284015765
