UX Review of updates to VBA Facility content type

[xiongjaneg]

User Story or Problem Statement

Review implementation in #14701

Design

Figma file

Tasks

• Review editorial interface components for usability and compliance with CMS design system
• Review all text (help text, field labels, tool tips, error messages) for UX writing best practices
  • "Prepare for your visit" help text should be rewritten to avoid phrase "location services"
• Consider broader user flow(s) for the task(s) and make sure this logically integrates/references other Drupal entities
• Consider order of centralized content sections comment from 14899
  • "🥝 The order of the centralized content sections doesn't seem to follow the order they appear on the Facility content type which seems confusing to me"
• Consider Veteran-facing labels from comment in 14528
• Consult with Engineering to understand what technical limitations may prevent updating interface
• Document any recommendations for improving the interface

Acceptance Criteria (Sprint 98) - 8 points

• Recommendations are documented in Figma

Acceptance Criteria (Sprint 99) - 5 points

• Implement feedback
• Review with UX Lead (Amanda)
• Review with Content Designer (Dave)
• Review with Engineers
• Review with Accessibility

Acceptance Criteria (Sprint 100) - 5 points

• Implement feedback
• Review with Content Designer (Dave)
• Review with Engineers (may be done at UX sync) Engineering review is first step of Update VBA Facility post-review and collab cycle feedback #16327
• Share mockup for review by UX Lead (Amanda) - 48h turnaround suggested

[davidmpickett]

While this is not fully blocked by #14700, it might make sense to wait for that since it will be updating this content type

[mmiddaugh]

@thejordanwood as you review, please look for opportunities to give the editors context for the purpose/intended use of the content and/or link to (coming soon) KB articles
The following are not relevant to VBA facilities

• guidance to avoid duplication of COVID-19 status (referenced in the operating status area)
• guidance to add visiting hours, lodging options, or food options in the Prepare for your visit

The "Top of page information" heading and "Page introduction" field seem duplicative as they follow the Benefit office overview box (which cannot be edited).

[thejordanwood]

I've started my UX review in the Figma file and am working on getting feedback.

A couple of notes about the ACs:

1. Consider order of centralized content sections - This looks pretty close to the order we have them in on the FE now. I believe this is okay as is.
2. Consider Veteran-facing labels - @davidmpickett I think I need more guidance on this. I've looked at the comment on 14528 and am unsure what needs to change on the VBA Facility content type.

[thejordanwood]

End of sprint update:

I started a Slack thread for feedback. I can make any updates to this whenever I get to the CMS collab cycle feedback ticket, so I'm going to call this finished for now.

[mmiddaugh]

@thejordanwood Apologies for my delayed review. I added comments to the Figma - a few areas need your eyes again.
Also, I may have missed them but I didn't notice a few fields which appear after a content type is added, such as

• the fields used to create spotlights
• the fields used to create a banner alert

We'll want to include those to ensure the editors can understand how to use the fields and are aware of character counts.
Reopening this issue

[jilladams]

@thejordanwood FYI we discussed this ticket in sprint planning -- some notes:

• Amanda noted we need to make sure UX review tickets do get the PO or UX lead review before closing moving forward, so leaving this ticket open to track updates from Michelle's comment above.
• The notes from Michelle are re: fields that appear conditionally. We can address those 2 notes here.
  • The Figma will in the end need to display not just the default form state, but the conditionals for any additional conditional fields. That bigger piece could be handled in the existing stubbed ticket for final Figma updates post-all-Drupal-work. (Dave estimated ~2-3 for that work, but @thejordanwood could you confirm?)
    • Note: I looked through the VBA epic and don't see that bigger picture Figma update ticket (just Design error states for VBA content types #16068 ), so we may need to confirm its existence.
• @xiongjaneg noting: we will need a ticket (eventually) for engineers to make the updates that will be finalized in the Figma

[thejordanwood]

@jilladams @xiongjaneg Apologies for closing this too early. My original intention was to get all final feedback after making the updates from the CMS collab cycle feedback ticket, but reopening this ticket makes sense too!

• I'd like to point this ticket at a 5 for this sprint.
• @jilladams This is the bigger picture Figma update ticket, which I have pointed at an 8.

[thejordanwood]

The design has been updated in the Figma file.

• The fields used in the banner alert are shown on the VBA Banners page in the Figma file. This is on a different page because it was part of a previous UX review.
• I show the expanded Prepare for your visit accordions section and had two suggested changes.
• I show the expanded Local spotlights section and have no suggested changes. Field labels are consistent with other fields in the CMS.

[davidmpickett]

This is a big piece of Should feedback about the order of the fields on this form. Might not be necessary to update the Figma file to reflect this, but just pass this along to Drupal folk in their follow up ticket

• Suggestion - The order of elements in the Drupal form should generally match the order those elements appear on the front end to help editors build a mental model of the impact of their edits.
• Evidence - Vet Center Editor research
  • "Matching the front-end sequence streamlines content findability. "
  • "People started to recognize on the form the sequence of information displayed on the front-end, e.g. order of operating status field didn't make sense for people."
• Detailed order suggestion
  • Banner alert
  • Benefit office overview
  • Location and contact information
    • Facility operating status
    • Facility photo
    • Gray box of uneditable fields
      • Move "benefit hours may vary" and "benefits hotline" into this box
  • Prepare for your visit
  • In the spotlight
  • Facility Services
    • Consider adding an HTML field here that simply explains that Facility Services (Veteran Benefits, family member benefits etc.) are created separately (with link to relevant KB)
  • Can't find the field you're looking for?
  • Get updates
  • Other VA locations
    • Consider adding an HTML field here that states that "other nearby VA locations" is generated automatically.

[davidmpickett]

2. Consider Veteran-facing labels - @davidmpickett I think I need more guidance on this. I've looked at the comment on 14528 and am unsure what needs to change on the VBA Facility content type.

In between the time I made that comment and you picked up this ticket, I worked with our Drupal devs to address this during their implementation, so it was already done. Sorry for any confusion!

[jilladams]

For @aklausmeier 's context when she returns:

1. From Jordan in Slack: https://dsva.slack.com/archives/C0FQSS30V/p1702588501447089?thread_ts=1701468972.917869&cid=C0FQSS30V.

I've made some updates to the VBA Facility content type in the Figma file and now show expanded field groups. Feel free to give this another look!

2. Dave has 2 proposals that need signoff:
   1. in comment above: rearrange Drupal form to field order to match FE field order
   2. In Figma annotations: some suggestions for new show/hide behavior and other Drupal suggestions. We could get yes/no on several of those.
      • There are some Drupal items that need @omahane / @swirtSJW to verify if they're technically possible. Following up on this in Slack.

(@davidmpickett lemme know if anything there seems wrong to you.)

[davidmpickett]

Given @swirtSJW's feedback about hiding certain fields based on role not being a good direction, here's an alternate suggestion for the big gray box of uneditable information in Locations and Contact Information:

• SHOULD - Group the fields based on whether they display on the front-end webpage or not
• CONSIDER - Using the existing "DB data" box for grouping all the non-Veteran facing fields together
  • Facility Locator API ID
  • Classification
  • Geolocation
  • Shared VHA location
  • Rename the box to something plain language for editors
• SHOULD - Add a text explanation about the non-Veteran facing fields

[thejordanwood]

End of sprint update:

I've started building out a better mockup to accurately show the suggestions and feedback that are being discussed here. I'll send it back out for feedback within the next couple of days.

[aklausmeier]

@thejordanwood While you are working on a revised mockup....I added comments in Figma file to Facility page

Also, just noting that @mmiddaugh recommended linking back to relevant and helpful KB articles when possible in this comment above.

[jilladams]

@thejordanwood @xiongjaneg FYI chatted with Amanda and updated ACs here based on that convo -- please update if points don't seem right for what's left to do. Also assumed you'd need review from all the same folks - not sure if that's true.

[thejordanwood]

@aklausmeier @davidmpickett @swirtSJW @omahane I've created a new mockup in the Figma file to show Dave's order suggestions and other updates based on the feedback that's been provided. This is ready for review again.

[aklausmeier]

@thejordanwood FE and Drupal designs looks good, marking UX review complete

[jilladams]

For end of sprint: Just need to verify if there are any questions left for or from Dave / engineers. If not, can close

[davidmpickett]

Adding my face to account for reviewing effort

[davidmpickett]

✅ All my requested edits from the last round were implemented. I left a couple comments about help text, etc, but those are not blockers to closing this ticket

[davidmpickett]

@xiongjaneg @jilladams Engineers have reviewing this Figma file as an AC in their follow-up ticket, so I don't see any reason to keep this one open.