Design: Revisit layout of ".gov domain" step

[Katherine-Osos]

Issue description

The .gov domain page of the request form has come up as a potential area for improvement to guide users to make better domain requests. An insight from the Diary Study revealed that analysts have seen a large increase in unviable domain names. These names are often initials of organizations with very low character counts (like 4–5). We discussed in product huddle that a possible solution would be to revisit the design of the .gov domain page. This issue has existed for a while, but it has been modified with feedback from the analysts and suggested visual design and content updates by the design team.

Elements and suggested changes to consider as part of this ticket:

• Fix wall of text: The ".gov domain" step displays a lot of text above the fields users need to fill out. Users are likely to skim and not read all of this. How can we shorten the copy and use more visual hierarchy to present the most pertinent info to a requestor?
• Make heading dynamic: We dynamically show domain examples based on the chosen Org Type. However, we use a generic heading for this section of the page: "Domain examples for your type of organization." Is it possible to dynamically update this heading based on the org type? (e.g. "Domain examples for counties")
• Examples are buried way under the the heading: We should bring these higher, give them more visual weight. I suggest that we also take the position of being more restrictive showing what not to do in addition to what you can do.
• Use h2s correctly: We're trying to use h2 headings only for the questions a user needs to answer; however, on this page, we're using an h2 to call out the domain examples. How can we address that?
• (optional) Consider moving the .gov domain page higher up in the request form: There has been some previous design thinking done by 18F on this subject which can be reviewed here.

Acceptance criteria

• [ ] Updated Figma designs created for the ".gov domain" page
• [ ] Dev ticket created to implement the design

Additional context

@gabydisarli has made mocked up an example of the page with some of the above suggestions.

Links to other issues

No response

[vickyszuchin]

Refinement tag: ticket was reviewed but deemed not ready for the backlog. More clarification is needed for 2nd bullet.

[vickyszuchin]

2nd bullet updated.

[gabydisarli]

this issue has been updated based on feedback from the Diary Study and discussions in product huddle

[h-m-f-t]

Another recurring issue the analyst team sees is that people make very short, 1-4 character requests. We can use this issue to offer guidance or throw warnings that these requests may not be approved (particularly for non-feds).

[h-m-f-t]

Adding refinement and sprinting so we can discuss to make some headway. This may be too big, but it's all good.

[h-m-f-t]

Moving this out of sprint 57 and de-prioritizing.