As a CIF administrator, I want to see a cleaner diff section in Amendments/General Revisions, so that I the clearer context of the changes is hidden but easily accessible

[nanyangpro]

Description:

As outcome of #1523, this is a cleaner version of #1569 preferred by users where all contextual/help text of why the user sees a certain change to a field which they didn't make is hidden behind a hover over tooltip.

This design will offer better readability allowing the user to focus on the changes they made while the context of the changes is still easily accessible.

- Design (Cleaner Version)

Acceptance Criteria:

Given I am a CIF Admin When I check the "Forms updated" section to see the changes in an Amendment or a General Revision Then I see the field name: Not entered / Not calculated / value (before) -> value (after) with a tooltip icon instead of the contextual help text

Given I am a CIF Admin When I hover over a tooltip icon next to a changed field Then I see the hidden contextual help text (implemented in #1569)telling why this change shows without the user manually making it

Development Checklist:

• [ ] Checklist item
• [ ] Checklist item
• [ ] Checklist item
• [ ] Meets the DOD

Definition of Ready (Note: If any of these points are not applicable, mark N/A)

• [ ] User story is included
• [ ] User role and type are identified
• [ ] Acceptance criteria are included
• [ ] Wireframes are included (if required)
• [ ] Design / Solution is accepted by Product Owner
• [ ] Dependencies are identified (technical, business, regulatory/policy)
• [ ] Story has been estimated (under 13 pts)

·Definition of Done (Note: If any of these points are not applicable, mark N/A)

• [ ] Acceptance criteria are tested by the CI pipeline
• [ ] UI meets accessibility requirements
• [ ] Configuration changes are documented, documentation and designs are updated
• [ ] Passes code peer-review
• [ ] Passes QA of Acceptance Criteria with verification in Dev and Test
• [ ] Ticket is ready to be merged to main branch
• [ ] Can be demoed in Sprint Review
• [ ] Bugs or future work cards are identified and created
• [ ] Reviewed and approved by Product Owner

Notes:

-

[nanyangpro]

AC was drafted, pending further refinements and Dev Checklist from the developers. Happy to provide clarifications.

[Sepehr-Sobhani]

Is tooltip implementation also part of this card? shouldn't we have a separate card for that?

[pbastia]

see #1270

[nanyangpro]

@pbastia: To be discussed in Backlog Refinement May 2.

[BCerki]

1569 is probably going to split out the contextual help AC, so this ticket could become the entire implementation of contextual help

[BCerki]

Contextual help text may not be implemented in https://app.zenhub.com/workspaces/climate-action-secretariat-60ca4121764d710011481ca2/issues/gh/bcgov/cas-cif/1569. If it's not implemented, this ticket can implement the help text directly into the tooltips (will need to add what the text is supposed to be in this ticket's description)

[nanyangpro]

1742 was create as a stop gap for #1573 & #1575. @dleard

[pbastia]

At this point this is a lot of work for value that hasn't been quite proven given #1742. I suggest iceboxing

[nanyangpro]

Good call, @pbastia - This ticket only makes sense when #1569 is in place. Given #1742 was suggested as a stop gap solution for #1569. This ticket (#1573) can be iceboxed.