The page where you switch on the feature
---
This content aims to describe:
- the benefit of basic view – ‘make Notify quicker and simpler’
- who it benefits – ‘team members who only need to send messages’
- how it does it – ‘by hiding…’
- what it prevents users from being able to do or see – ‘everything
except…’
- what it allows users to do – ‘send messages’, [see] ‘templates, a list
of sent messages’
I’m still keen to mention sent messages here, as it feels weird not to
mention it at all when it’s 1 of only 2 options in Basic view. I don’t
think it’s as important to mention it on the Edit team member screen.
I’ve specifically used ‘a list of sent messages’ rather than just ‘sent
messages’, to make it seem less like a noun (new feature).
The page where you choose whether someone has basic view
---
Switches the focus from what you can see to what you can’t.
Aims to be consistent with both:
- the description of permissions in admin view
- the language used to describe basic view in settings
Two tests retained the old syntax because of mocker conflict:
when logging in as a user through client_request, it sets up a
side_effect on user_api_client.get_user to the user you log in
as. If you later want to set return_value for get_user to
something else, problems start :d.
> Suggest making the H1 visible here for consistency, but also to make
> it clear to users what they’re looking at.
> This screen is similar to – but not exactly the same as – the
> individual text, email and letter dashboard screens from Admin view,
> so the H1 could help to distinguish it from them for users who may
> have interacted with both.
From Karl:
> Templates – this should be consistent with Admin view. Users may
> switch from Basic to Admin view (or vice versa), they will also
> interact with users who have a different view or permissions to them.
> Neither should have to learn new interfaces and language if possible.
> ‘Send a message’ was a nice, active label – but Notify options aren’t
> usually actions. If we’re going to change this we should be consistent
> across both Admin and Basic views.
> For the same reason, I have rejected ‘see’, ‘search’ and ‘view sent
> messages’. It will be interesting to see in user testing whether users
> read ‘sent messages’ as ‘send messages’.
- name
- email
- phone number
- services
- last login
- failed login attempts if any
The view can be accessed from results of find_users_by_email
logged_in_at added to User serialization on admin frontend as
a part of this work
This included:
- creating a new form SearchUsersByEmailForm with validation
on its search field
- introducing 400 status to the view if the form does not validate
- fixing the POST request data structure in the tests (it was
incorrect before and uncaught due to lack of validation and mocking
the response from the API.
Commit 58cc1604a7 sanitises any non-ascii
characters in the headers. CSV filenames get used as a header value, so
this fixed a bug that occurred when non-ascii characters were used.
The CSV filename also gets used as part of the metadata when uploading
the file to S3. Since the S3 metadata can only contain ASII characters,
we also need to sanitise the filename before uploading it to S3.
If an invite is cancelled then the user no longer has permission to do
anything, so we shouldn’t show the green tick. We already do this for
other permissions; this makes the ‘basic view’ row consistent.
Things we’ve noticed from looking at real data that we could handle in a
smarter way:
- removing numbers (there might be a tom.smith2@dept.gov.uk if tom.smith
is already taken)
- removing middle initials (again, these tend to be used for
disambiguation and aren’t included when we ask people for their names)
- ignoring email addresses which only have someone’s initial, not their
first name (because we can’t make a decent guess in this case)
Most people’s names, especially in government are in the format
firstname.lastname@department.gov.uk. This means that you can pretty
reliably guess that their name is ‘Firstname Lastname’.
When users are invited to Notify we know their email address already.
So this commit pre-populates the registration form based on this guess.
This is a nice little detail, but it should also stop the browser
pre-filling the name field with someone’s email address (which I think
happens because the browser assumes a registration form will have an
email field).
It looks too prominent as a paragraph on the page. This commit moves
the info about how long we keep data for into the ‘empty’ message we
show when there are no results (ie the message people will see if they
search for something that was sent more than 7 days ago).
Can’t think of a good reason why someone who is only sending messages
would need a download of all the messages their entire team has sent.
Most of the ‘caseworking’ teams have been getting on fine without this
link; it’s only recently we brought it back.
We had kept the original platform-admin page at `/platform-admin` and
created a new page, `/platform-admin-new` for the new platform admin
page. Now that the numbers on both pages look ok we no longer need both
pages, so can replace the original page.
One of the big things we found in user research was that people were
uncertain what the effect of giving someone basic view was.
So in the spirit of ‘show don’t tell’, this commit adds a way for users
to preview basic view. They can go into the preview and click around as
much as they like, just as if they really had the basic view assigned to
them.
Once they have seen enough they can return to the settings page where
they can decide whether or not to switch basic view on for real.
