QA: ETC for Host Consent for Accessing HOG Data

[rstens]

Exploratory Testing Charter for Host Consent for HOUS Accessing HOG Data

Charter Objective:

Explore the functionality, UI, and accessibility for the "Host Consent" feature on the Principal Residence Requirement page in HOUS, ensuring that no repetitive or unnecessary tests are performed. Focus on verifying efficient and clear consent handling, accessibility for different users, and page performance under various conditions.

User Story Overview:

• As an examiner,
• I want the host to indicate consent for HOUS accessing their HOG data from FIN on the Principal Residence Requirement page (Step 3),
• So that I can verify if I can access the host's HOG data or not.

Business Rules:

• Host can provide or withhold consent on Step 3, regardless of principal residence status.
• Consent is optional (i.e., not required to submit the application).
• Consent status is visible on the Step 4 Review page, Application Details page, and visible to the examiner.

Test Scope:

• UI/UX flow: Interaction with consent on Step 3, reflection on Step 4 and Application Details.
• Data flow: Correct data capture and display across pages for both host and examiner.
• Accessibility: Ensure compliance with keyboard navigation, screen reader support, and low vision adjustments.
• Performance: Page load performance with both high-speed and low-speed internet.

Risks & Considerations:

• Data Handling: Ensure accurate data transfer between host consent input and what the examiner views.
• User Confusion: The optional consent checkbox might confuse some users—test for clarity in UI and instructions.
• Accessibility Compliance: Avoid missing any key accessibility elements for keyboard-only and screen reader users.

Charter Wrap-up:

After testing, document any issues found, specifically noting any failure in data capture, user confusion, or accessibility problems. Provide actionable feedback for UI/UX improvements, if necessary, focusing on clarity and usability for hosts and examiners alike.

[rstens]

Tester:

• [ ] Done

Session 1: UI/UX Flow for Host Consent on Step 3

• Focus: Validate the user interface and interaction for the consent checkbox on Step 3 of the Principal Residence Requirement page.
• Scope: Ensure that the host can either provide or withhold consent and that the checkbox is clearly visible and functional. Verify that the consent interaction is reflected accurately on Step 4 (Review page).
• Goal: Confirm that the UI is intuitive and correctly handles consent actions, displaying the user's choice appropriately.

Documentation

Time Spent:

What did you Test?

Any observations you want to share?

Bug Report References:

[rstens]

Tester:

• [ ] Done

Session 2: Data Flow and Persistence for Consent Status

• Focus: Ensure accurate data capture and persistence of consent status across pages.
• Scope: Test the flow of consent data from the Principal Residence Requirement page (Step 3) to the Review page (Step 4) and the Application Details page. Confirm that examiners can view the host’s consent choice.
• Goal: Ensure that consent data is consistently captured and correctly displayed for both the host and examiner.

Documentation

Time Spent:

What did you Test?

Any observations you want to share?

Bug Report References:

[rstens]

Tester:

• [ ] Done

Session 3: Accessibility Testing for Consent Feature

• Focus: Ensure that the consent feature is accessible for all users.
• Scope: Test for keyboard navigation, screen reader compatibility, and support for users with low vision. Verify that the consent checkbox is accessible and labeled correctly for screen readers.
• Goal: Confirm that the consent feature meets accessibility standards and is usable for individuals with disabilities.

Documentation

Time Spent:

What did you Test?

Any observations you want to share?

Bug Report References:

[rstens]

Tester:

• [ ] Done

Session 4: Clarity of Consent Feature for Users

• Focus: Assess the clarity and usability of the consent feature for hosts.
• Scope: Test the consent feature with a focus on potential user confusion, especially regarding the optional nature of consent. Verify that instructions and UI design are clear and do not mislead users into thinking consent is required.
• Goal: Identify any areas where the consent feature could be confusing or unclear to users and suggest improvements.

Documentation

Time Spent:

What did you Test?

Any observations you want to share?

Bug Report References:

[rstens]

Tester:

• [ ] Done

Session 5: Performance Testing of the Consent Feature

• Focus: Assess the performance of the Principal Residence Requirement page, particularly with the consent feature.
• Scope: Test page load times and responsiveness, especially with different internet speeds (high-speed and low-speed). Ensure that the page performs well under various conditions without lag or delays.
• Goal: Confirm that the page and consent feature load efficiently and perform well under varying network conditions.

Documentation

Time Spent:

What did you Test?

Any observations you want to share?

Bug Report References:

[rstens]

Tester:

• [ ] Done

Session 6: Review and Examiner Data Validation

• Focus: Validate the display of consent status for examiners.
• Scope: Ensure that examiners can view the host’s consent choice on the Application Details page. Verify that the displayed consent status matches what the host selected in Step 3.
• Goal: Confirm that the data presented to the examiner accurately reflects the host’s consent status.

Documentation

Time Spent:

What did you Test?

Any observations you want to share?

Bug Report References:

[rstens]

Tester:

• [ ] Done

Session 7: Key Scenarios and Edge Cases for Consent Feature

• Focus: Explore various scenarios and edge cases related to the consent feature.
• Scope: Test scenarios where the host changes their consent after navigating to the next step. Explore edge cases such as incomplete form submissions or page refreshes to ensure data integrity.
• Goal: Identify edge cases where the consent feature might fail or behave unexpectedly and ensure data consistency.

Documentation

Time Spent:

What did you Test?

Any observations you want to share?

Bug Report References: