As a member of the public (permittee), I can be directed to pay.gov (mock) to pay for my permits for Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests

[sadlerw]

Acceptance Criteria

• [x] user can clearly see how to go to pay.gov (link or button)
• [x] user can see "what to expect" information about the flow/interaction between site and pay.gov before they click the submit button and are routed to pay.gov (flesh out the details as much as possible based on the actual flow)
• [x] user lands on correct permit page in pay.gov (MOCK for this story)
• [ ] user sees information (username and forest org code only for tracer bullet) after it is sent to pay.gov (pii good pci bad - redirect back will be in a separate story) MOCK (Question on how forest name will display for use on pay.gov)

Definition of Done

• [x] Code unit / e2e tested and comply with QWASP
• [x] No new security vulnerabilities
• [x] Internal team code review
• [x] Documentation / readme.md / CircleCI updated
• [x] Docker updated
• [x] Compare finished design with mockup

Tasks

• [x] provide documentation and password (Laura)
• [x] create a mock pay.gov interface that mimics the known api (cameron, seth)
• [x] set environment variables to support the mock interface based on known api (shekar)
• [x] create REST endpoint to route to mock pay.gov service (shekar, seth)
• [x] frontend service for integration with REST api (seth, cameron)
• [x] tie form submission on frontend to angular service (seth)
• [x] create mock view frontend (keep it simple - throwaway later) (Cameron)
• [x] create json to xml in the service layer (seth, shekar)
• [x] resolve the issues reported in codeclimate for sprint-3 (seth, shekar)
• [x] remove the unused vap_services, and update manifests for pay-gov (Shekar)
• [x] update readme to reflect the updated vcap_services (Shekar)
• [ ] add forest org code to xml
• [x] fix error box missing (Seth)

[cameronwolf]

Updated schemas for steps 2-5 schema.zip

[shekarpendem]

@lauraGgit @ASprinkle @MelissaBraxton Attached is the screenshot of the mock Pay.Gov payment form. Can you provide your feedback on this whether it meets the acceptance criteria?

[MelissaBraxton]

Great progress! A few thoughts:

• It seems odd to me that the payment amount appears in a grayed out text box, when users will not enter that info. The $## text just appears on the page on the previous screen, so I'd expect something similar here.
  • I'm curious about why we are showing the "selected option" and "description" to users here? If it is to remind users what they are buying, then I'd put it above the form fields and group it with the price so that people can confirm that the buying options are correct before they enter their card data.
  • Can we get rid of "description" or provide a more descriptive label? What is this a description of, and how is it different from "selected option?"
  • The term "applicant" is confusing as we decided to change the language to "buy" on the previous page. Consider changing to "permit-holder" or "permittee?" @ASprinkle, is there a FS-preferred term here?
  • What is the purpose of the "form name" field? Will this be editable by users (right now it looks that way, but I'm not sure that is the intent)?
  • The red color on the "review and submit payment button" raises alarm. Any reason why you chose not to go with the same green as on the checkout button?
  • A few form fields should be shortened to better match the number of characters that will be input: State (assuming we're using the 2 char abbrev.), Zip code, expiration date (month and year), and security code.
  • Interesting that there are no drop downs for address fields. Do we have an idea of how address data will be validated?

^ @lpendem and @sethalt

[ASprinkle]

Permit Holder would be preferred. There isn't really an "application" process that goes through a review, so "Applicant" could be confusing.

[shekarpendem]

@MelissaBraxton @lauraGgit We have created only a mock page to mimic Pay.gov from, and the form fields are taken from an existing agency form (screenshot below). We do not any control over the actual form, and we'll update this form when we get more clarify on the actual form.

[shekarpendem]

@lauraGgit @MelissaBraxton Here is the updated pay.gov Mock page with the changes requested by @lauraGgit Please comment with Approved if you feel like this meets the acceptance criteria.

[lauraGgit]

Almost there! The cardholder name should not be greyed out, and the label should be "Account Holder Name."

Also the "Agency Transaction ID" was listed at the top. At this point this would be the permit ID I believe.

[shekarpendem]

@lauraGgit @MelissaBraxton Here is the updated screen shot with that change:

[MelissaBraxton]

Is there a reason that the state/zip fields are running together? Can we add some padding between the state and zip fields?

Melissa Braxton User Experience Designer, 18F Cell: (415) 696-4216 https://18f.gsa.gov/

On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Laxmisekar Pendem <notifications@github.com

wrote:

@lauraGgit https://github.com/lauraggit @MelissaBraxton https://github.com/melissabraxton Here is the updated screen shot with that change: [image: screen shot 2017-12-04 at 1 25 00 pm] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7645088/33569193-e257b2b4-d8f6-11e7-8bba-4843bdc2f211.png

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/nciinc/fs-intake-module/issues/13#issuecomment-349057079, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ATscntz8PgOXYxRX785sVb1GJ1s7xBMVks5s9DmagaJpZM4P3IQ- .

[shekarpendem]

@MelissaBraxton Sure, here is the updated version of the page: