bcgov / foi-flow

Freedom of Information modernization
Apache License 2.0
5 stars 3 forks source link

Create Consultation - Ministry Coordinator #1277

Open m-prodan opened 2 years ago

m-prodan commented 2 years ago

Assumptions & Scope

**A valid Request ID follows the format of XXX-####-##### (X's = letters, #'s = numbers)

What is IN scope? Ministry team manually creating a consult for tracking Consultation appearing in Ministry queue

What is NOT in scope? State updates to the consultation Comments log for a consultation Attachment log for a consultation Notifications related to consultations View Consult Screen after Creation

Acceptance Criteria

Scenario 1: Create a Consultation

Scenario 2: Mandatory fields

Scenario 3: Create Consult Button Inactive

Scenario 4: Ministry Assignee

Scenario 4: Calendar Pickers - Response Due Date

Scenario 5: Calendar Pickers - Request Description - Start Date

Scenario 6: Calendar Pickers - Request Description - End Date

Scenario 7: Public Body - Make Selection

Scenario 8 - Public Body - Change Selection

Scenario 9 - Public Body - Other Field

Scenario 10 - Public Body - Uncheck Other Field

Scenario 11 - inValid Request ID Entered

Scenario 12 - Applicant Category Dropdown Options

Scenario 13 - Divisional Tracking

Scenario 14 - Create Consult Button Activation

Scenario 15 - Create Consult

Scenario 16 - Create Consult - Continue

Scenario 17 - Create Consult - Cancel back to Create

Scenario 18 - Navigate Away while Changes made

Dependencies? What is the impact of this dependency? (If so, link dependency in the ticket, make it visible in a team´s backlog)

Validation Rules? (If yes, list here)

Design @xxx - please link the Design here

Definition of Ready

  1. [ ] Is there a well articulated User Story?
  2. [ ] Is there Acceptance Criteria that covers all scenarios (happy/sad paths)?
  3. [ ] If there is a user interface, is there a design?
  4. [ ] Does the user story need user research/validation?
  5. [ ] Does this User Story needs stakeholder approval?
  6. [ ] Design / Solution accepted by Product Owner
  7. [ ] Is this user story small enough to be completed in a Sprint? Should it be split?
  8. [ ] Are the dependencies known/ understood? (technical, business, regulatory/policy)
  9. [ ] Has the story been estimated?

Definition of Done

  1. [ ] Passes developer unit tests
  2. [ ] Passes peer code review
  3. [ ] If there's a user interface, passes UX assurance
  4. [ ] Passes QA of Acceptance Criteria with verification in Dev and Test
  5. [ ] Confirm Test cases built and succeeding
  6. [ ] No regression test failures
  7. [ ] Test coverage acceptable by Product Owner
  8. [ ] Ticket ready to be merged to master or story branch
  9. [ ] Developer to list Config changes/ Update documents and designs
  10. [ ] Can be demoed in Sprint Review
  11. [ ] Tagged as part of a Release
  12. [ ] Feature flagged if required
  13. [ ] Change Management activities done?
m-prodan commented 2 years ago

Another monster story... 18 scenarios :) I believe I've captured all the functionality I could see from @JHarrietha-AOT designs. One thing to note - I made it so date range is NOT mandatory - this is to cover off issues where a consult for requests that may not have a date range.

Will need some additional designs, like the "Create consult" button to be present on the Ministry queue view (similar to Intake's view to create a request)

Please review for comments, unsure if it makes sense to split this one up at all @arielleandrews @lmullane @mpilchar

Aiming to get this into this friday's refinement.

mpilchar commented 2 years ago

19 scenarios because there are two #4s ;) I will take a closer look, but suggest it probably makes sense to split once we get to this size, or it becomes a task in itself to make sure we've met all A/C!

mpilchar commented 2 years ago

Stellar job - you win the prize for most thorough story writer hands down

arielleandrews commented 2 years ago

Your hands must've been tired after this one! Re the date display of the calendar picker: we've heard from the devs previously it would require some customization effort to have the display be MMM DD YYYY since those are already preset. I think it's fine to leave in the AC for now but good to clarify when refining this story. And for the Public Body selection, does it make sense to restrict this so only one can be selected? Radio buttons instead of check boxes? Consults are typically sent and tracked individually.

m-prodan commented 2 years ago

Thanks for the feedback! I removed the date format, and re: restrictions - I did write it so that only one PB can be selected, but a radio button might be better, since a consult can only come from 1 location. Would need a design update as well.

As I was drafting up other stories, a thought came to me around the attachment log. Ministry coordinators may use it to store records, redline and responses. This could theoretically include protected C data. If this will have implications for the production launch and conversations we've been having, then we should forgo that functionality for consults. Thoughts on that @lmullane ?

lmullane commented 1 year ago

Likely need the "Add Request" button to change to a drop down with these options: Consult, FOI Request, Proactive Disclosure

cc @JHarrietha-AOT