At the moment we use two fields for names: first name and last name. This isn't particularly inclusive. Instead, it'd be great to switch to a single name field.
This will address the problem described in #683 and allow us to remove the ugly workaround described there.
Background
There are plenty of resources describing the reasoning behind switching to a single name field. This is, for example, considered a recommendation by the UK Government Digital Services:
It's not difficult work at all. But. It requires changes in many different places and hunting all them down and making sure that everything still works afterwards. So - simple and satisfying, but fiddly.
At the moment we use two fields for names: first name and last name. This isn't particularly inclusive. Instead, it'd be great to switch to a single name field.
This will address the problem described in #683 and allow us to remove the ugly workaround described there.
Background
There are plenty of resources describing the reasoning behind switching to a single name field. This is, for example, considered a recommendation by the UK Government Digital Services:
Estimate
2-4 days of work
Reasoning
It's not difficult work at all. But. It requires changes in many different places and hunting all them down and making sure that everything still works afterwards. So - simple and satisfying, but fiddly.