[DISCOVERY] Explore options for structural data: facility-level service descriptions

[mmiddaugh]

Problem Statement

How might we improve the content editorial experience for facility-level service descriptions?

Current behavior

• The current manual process of entering data for facility-level service descriptions is not efficient or scaleable. (For example: VISN 4 had 49 facilities, each with 40-70 health services)
• Much of the content is repeatable and may be converted to structured data with fields for content entry

Goal

Content structure which improves entry/migration and makes data searchable

Objectives or Key Results this is meant to further

• Objective 2: Deliver meaningful facility information

---

Tasks

Determine the right approach for refactoring/structural data for VAMC facility-level service descriptions, considering:

• [ ] What content can be pre-populated from health service level to health system level?
• [ ] Drupal vs automation?
• [ ] Tech debt resulting from the approach
• [ ] Ability to make the data searchable for display by other VA.gov apps
• [ ] Ability to make the data visible to Google (schema.org tags)

Acceptance Criteria

• [ ] Recommendation for approach to refactoring VAMC facility-level service descriptions

  How to configure this issue

• [ ] Attached to a Milestone (when will this be completed?)
• [ ] Attached to an Epic (what body of work is this a part of?)
• [ ] Labeled with Team (product support, analytics-insights, operations, service-design, tools-be, tools-fe)
• [ ] Labeled with Practice Area (backend, frontend, devops, design, research, product, ia, qa, analytics, contact center, research, accessibility, content)
• [ ] Labeled with Type (bug, request, discovery, documentation, etc.)

[davidmpickett]

May be irrelevant because Service Location paragraph type made this better

[jilladams]

We think this is outdated entirely except for: schema.org which may or may not be in another ticket.