- This is done using a new endpoint in the api.
- Removed the AddServiceForm in favor or using the ServiceNameForm
- Removed ServiceApiClient.find_all_service_email_from
It would be annoying to get all the way to the end of the flow and get
told that the phone number or email address you entered isn’t valid.
So this commit reuses the existing WTForms objects that we have to do
some extra validation on the first step in the send one-off message
flow. It also accounts for international phone numbers, if the service
is allowed to send them.
It doesn’t reject other people’s phone numbers if your service is
restricted, because I think it’s better to let users play with the
feature – it’s good for learning.
Because manually editing the URL isn’t a great user interface, this
commit adds a search field to do this on the user’s behalf.
For this pass at the story it doesn’t do any validation – the user will
just get no results if they search by something which isn’t a phone
number or email address.
If the user navigates to a different ‘bucket’ of notifications (eg
delivered, failed) then the search term is reset, because they’ve
changed the filter which is at a level above the search term.
The send yourself a test feature is useful for two things:
- constructing an email/text message/letter without uploading a CSV file
- seeing what the thing your going to send will look like (either by
getting it in your inbox or downloading the PDF)
- learning the concept of placeholders, ie understanding they’re thing
that gets populated with _stuff_
The problem we’re seeing is that the current UI breaks when a template
has a lot of placeholders. This is especially apparent with letter
templates, which have a minimum of 7 placeholders by virtue of the
address.
The idea behind having the form fields side-by-side was to help people
understand the relationship between their spreadsheet columns and the
placeholders. But this means that the page was doing a lot of work,
trying to teach:
- replacement of placeholders
- link between placeholders and spreadsheet columns
The latter is better explained by the example spreadsheet shown on the
upload page. So it can safely be removed from the send yourself a test
page – in other words the fields don’t need to be shown side by side.
Showing them one-at-a-time works well because:
- it’s really obvious, even on first use, what the page is asking you to
do
- as your step through each placeholder, you see the message build up
with the data you’ve entered – you’re learning how replacement of
placeholders works by repetition
This also means adding a matching endpoint for viewing each step of
making the test letter as a PDF/PNG because we can’t reuse the view of
the template without any placeholders filled any more.
This is a term that one of our research participants used to describe
the big bold text that starts each letter. I think it’s quite a nice
plain english term for it.
Also changes the formatting guidance to use the word heading instead of
title, for consistency.
Does two main things:
- defines what ‘brands’ we support, in terms of the ID that DVLA use
- adds a form to choose which branding a service uses (currently
platform admin only, like email branding)
By doing this we will be able to (with some more work) preview and send
letters with a variety of different branding.
Story: https://www.pivotaltracker.com/story/show/143506905
Letter templates have (or will have) multiple different editable
regions. I think that the most intuitive way for this to work is to have
- an edit link for each of these areas
- positioned next to the thing to be edited
Again, this isn’t fully hooked up, but since no-one is using letters
live yet this is a good way of getting research feedback and pointing
towards where we want the feature to go.
Uses percentages for the positioning so that the alignment is maintained
on mobile.
Not everyone knows how to use `ctrl` + `f`, and it’s not scoped to
just the list of templates.
The template you want to work with is often not the first one in the
list, but ordering by created at is useful for other reasons (mainly
around first time use).
This commit adds a find as you type control which aims to give users a
quick way of getting to the template they want to work with.
no actual template functionality yet - just the ability for services
that have letters enabled to edit a 10 line block that will go on the
top right hand side of their letters with contact information
Right now we have separate pages for email and text message templates.
In the future we will also have a separate page for letter templates.
This commit changes Notify to only have one page for all templates.
What is the problem?
---
The left-hand navigation is getting quite crowded, at 8 items for a
service that can send letters. Research suggests that the number of
objects an average human can hold in working memory is 7 ± 2 [1]. So
we’re at the limit of how many items the navigation should have.
In the future we will need to search/sort/filter templates by attributes
other than type, for example:
- show me the ‘confirmation’ templates
- show me the most recently used templates
- show me all templates containing the placeholder `((ref_no))`
These are hypothetical for now, but these needs (or others) may become
real in the future. At this point pre-filtering the list of templates
by type would restrict what searches a user could do. So by making this
change now we’re in a better position to iterate the design in the
future.
What’s the change?
---
This commit replaces the ‘Email templates’, ‘Text message templates’ and
‘Letter templates’ pages with one page called ‘Templates’.
This new templates page shows all the templates for the service, sorted
by most recently created first (as before).
To add a new template there is a new page with a form asking you what
kind of template you want to create. This is necessary because in the
past we knew what kind of template you wanted to create based on the
kind you were looking at.
What’s the impact of this change on new users?
---
This change alters the onboarding process slightly. We still want to
take people through the empty templates page from the call-to-action on
the dashboard because it helps them understand that to send a message
using Notify you need a template. But because we don’t have separate
pages for emails/text messages we will have to send users through the
extra step of choosing what kind of template to create. This is a bit
clunkier on first use but:
- it still gets the point across
- it takes them through the actual flow they will be using to create new
templates in the future (ie they’re learning how to use Notify, not
just being taken through a special onboarding route)
I’m not too worried about this change in terms of the experience for new
users. Furthermore, by making it now we get to validate whether it’s
causing any problems in the lab research booked for next week.
What’s the impact of this change on current services?
---
Looking at the top 15 services by number of templates[2], most are using
either text messages or emails. So this change would not have a
significant impact on these services because the page will not get any
longer. In other words we wouldn’t be making it worse for them.
Those services who do use both are not using as many templates. The
worst-case scenario is SSCS, who have 16 templates, evenly split between
email and text messages. So they would go from having 8 templates per
page to 16, which is still less than half the number that HMPO or
Digital Marketplace are managing.
References
---
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two
2. Template usage by service
Service name | Template count | Template types
---------------------------------------|----------------|---------------
Her Majesty's Passport Office | 40 | sms
Digital Marketplace | 40 | email
GovWifi-Staging | 19 | sms
GovWifi | 18 | sms
Digital Apprenticeship Service | 16 | email
SSCS | 16 | both
Crown Commercial Service MI Collection | 15 | email
Help with Prison Visits | 12 | both
Digital Future | 12 | email
Export Licensing Service | 11 | email
Civil Money Claims | 9 | both
DVLA Drivers Medical Service | 9 | sms
GOV.UK Notify | 8 | both
Manage your benefit overpayments | 8 | both
Tax Renewals | 8 | both
Not sure why we had a non-breaking space in here because it didn’t wrap
onto two lines anyway. And it wasn’t working because it was showing up
encoded, rather than as a raw entity.
If you report a problem we want to be able to get back to you to find
out more information, or to update you on the status of a fix. So it
shouldn’t be possible to report a problem without providing an email
address.
This commit makes `email_address` a required field when `ticket_type` is
problem.
This requires a bit of fiddling with the tests which weren’t expecting
to have to provide an email address. So the tests now either:
- pass an email address
- check for an error when they don’t pass an email address
TL;DR, as much as possible we should work out how to prioritise tickets
and not put that burden on the user. However, there are some cases where
we can’t.
In business hours all tickets are high priority, ie we will at least
acknowledge them within 30 mins.
If we are not in business hours then we need to know if a ticket is
serious enough to get someone out of bed. Only the user can tell us
this, but we can give them some examples to help them decide.
In addition, out-of-hours tickets are only a priority if the user has
live services. Normally we can determine this and do the
priority-setting in the background.
If they can’t log in then we can’t determine what services they have. So
in this case they will need to use the emergency email address, which
only users with live services will have.
The logic for this gets fairly complex. It might be to easier to
understand what’s going on by walking through the test cases, which are
a bit more declarative.
N.B. Deskpro’s ‘urgency’ is descending, eg 10 is the most urgent and 1
is the least.
The kind of communications we’re getting at the moment can broadly be
broken down into:
- problems
- questions and feedback
We will need to triage problems differently, because they could
potentially be urgent/severe/emergency/P1/whatever language we use.
Questions or feedback will never be P1.
Two reasons for making the user categorise their tickets themselves:
- Outside of hours we can’t get someone out of bed in order to decide if
a ticket is a problem or just feedback
- We can tailor the subsequent pages to whether it’s a problem or
feedback (eg showing a link to the status page if the user is having
a problem)
This commit let’s users make the choice with a pair of radio buttons.
It also cleans up a bunch of the tests and parameterizes them so we’re
testing the flow for both ticket types.
There is a check that the template can not be created as priority if the user is not a platform admin.
There is a check that the template can not change the `priority` unless they are a platform admin.
Right now we can show what a letter template looks like as a PDF or PNG.
This commit completes the work so this is also possible when:
- showing a template with the placeholders replaced
- showing any version of a template
Also removes dependency on `Exception().message`, which was deprecated
in Python 2.6. See
97f82d565f
for full details.
Let users create/edit/delete letter templates.
Let them upload a CSV file or send a test against a letter template.
Big assumption at the moment is that addresses only have one line, and
therefore one column in the CSV file.
If we want someone to read something (ie that they need to have the MOU
signed), then the best way is to make them interact with it.
And if someone doesn’t have the MOU in place, then we need to know to
send them a copy. The best way of them telling us this is in this form,
rather than sending them to the generic contact form and have them
compose a message saying ‘please send me the MOU thanks’, which we
haven’t seen anyone actually do.
