USDAForestService / USFS-timber-permitting

The focal point for an 18F/TTS project with the United States Forest Service on timber permitting
Other
6 stars 3 forks source link

***NOTE: all of the work for this card was done on card 113 - As a Firewood Permitting Admin I'd like the number of cords a user can select to be restricted to the maximum allowable number #169

Open Dmac26 opened 4 years ago

Dmac26 commented 4 years ago

Background The current dropdown selection for the number of cords a user can choose is only showing the option "4". Ideally the dropdown would present a range from the minimum to the maximum permissible number of cords. Each forest has a different minimum and maximum and the dropdown should reflect each forest's standards with accompanying validation.

Firewood_Dropdown.png

Acceptance criteria

Tasks

Definition of done

carlsonem commented 4 years ago

Obtain the information for the limits on the content standardization page

Rebekah-Hernandez commented 3 years ago

@Dmac26 Finally received confirmation from the last forest today so here are the maximum limits for the forests. Chattahoochee's is so high because they don't have a set limit so it is the national handbook's maximum.

Idaho Panhandle: 4 cord minimum purchase - 12 cord max limit Flathead: 4 cord minimum purchase - 12 cord max limit George Washington and Jefferson: 6 cord purchase only allowed Chattahoochee-Oconee: 3 cord minimum purchase - 200 cord max limit Hiawatha: 4 cord minimum purchase - 20 cord max limit GMUG: 4 cord minimum purchase - 20 cord max limit Shoshone: 3 cord minimum purchase - 10 cord max limit

Dmac26 commented 3 years ago

@MelissaBraxton @aQuib @tram - Hey everybody, I was looking through the "ready" column and came across this one. I was under the impression we were moving away from a dropdown and using an input field instead. I've already made the change for that as I was working on card 113 and it works well, but I can definitely take this on if I was mistaken.

MelissaBraxton commented 3 years ago

@Dmac26 - You're correct that the text input is the path forward. I'm a little unclear as the history behind this issue, and it doesn't have any acceptance criteria. It mentions a bug/typo, but it looks like it's about restricting users to purchasing more than the max allowed per forest, which is covered under #113. @Dmac26 it looks like you created this issues--with the work covered under 113 can it be closed?

mtlaney commented 3 years ago

Calculations appear to be correct on the open forest side. We will need to verify we are sending the right amount to pay.gov