Conditional Logic Test: Canadian Dental Application

[srtalbot]

Goal

• re-create the application for dental on GC Forms to identify how close the product is to supporting a similar type of form.
• Identify bugs, or usability issues (to validate with other real clients).

Notes and documentation

Rich text editor:

When copying and pasting from the website, it is difficult to get the spacing correct for headers. e.g.:

The spacing between "Terms of Use... and Changes to these..." headings are different in the editor; though they appear the same on the test screen.

Show/hide additional information:

Required button

It didn't update immediately, I clicked it, nothing happened. After I returned to the section after navigating away, it was updated to a required question.

We may want to revisit our pattern that questions are by default optional. Most questions in gov forms are required by default.

Relationship between test view and edit

When I was on the fourth section of the form I expected the test screen would take me to that section of the form, rather than the beginning.

Starting at the beginning means that I have to answer all of the required questions to get to the page that I want to see.

Dropdowns / multi-option components

1. A preset drop down / searchable list for countries and provinces would greatly speed things up.
2. Adding in bulk from a list would be very helpful. (Extra points if it's an unstructured list like bullets from a word doc.
3. Sometimes the dropdown conditional logic needs to change order in French, e.g., when the drop down is dependent on

PEI is in the 10th position in EN and 3rd position in FR. The subsequent radio buttons are not able to adapt (at least I don't think they are) to accommodate. In EN, position 3 is Manitoba, which has one option. In FR position 3 is PEI, which has 2 radio button options.

Some flows must exit and not confirm

In this form the applicant is not able to file for someone else. If they choose that selection they are off boarded from the form entirely. Do not pass go, do not collect $200... Though they do get a chance to "go back" one step.

Focus issue:

In the test screen, when selecting "married" on "marital status" I was sent to "spouse or common-law partner's information" which was good. However, the focus started at the bottom of the page instead of at the top.

Review page shows all possible selections for a question

When asked if the applicant has additional dental coverage, and they select "yes" for provincial or territorial coverage, they are asked what province. From there they select the province and the type of dental coverage they have. The review page shows all possible selections. It should show just the selection made, in the pic below, it should be MB only. (it's showing AB as well in this one because I made an error on the form)

Removing rules

When a rule is removed in the "add a rule" option, the visual identifier linking a child question to the parent question is not removed. In the example below, "Question 25" is no longer associated with any of the child elements. Navigating away from the section updated the elements.

Start page on the review page?

If there isn't a question in the start page we shouldn't show it in the review page.

[samsadasivan]

@timarney I think we could add the option for multiple views here or edit the view based on the complexity? I remember Dave mentioning the "top down" view of the map

[samsadasivan]

This is great 😍 the little things