Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature Requests / Clarifications from the USDS @ DHS Team #70

Closed
kaschm-usds opened this issue Jun 6, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Feature Requests / Clarifications from the USDS @ DHS Team #70

kaschm-usds opened this issue Jun 6, 2018 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
[practice] product Product related work [type] enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@kaschm-usds
Copy link

kaschm-usds commented Jun 6, 2018

We are building a prototype using the US Forms System for the USCIS Fee Waiver (I-912) Form. There are a few features that we'll need from either USFS code or that we can custom-create. I've transfered info from out email exchange below so we can sort it all out.

NB: @ju-liem - not sure how to label this. Halp!

Feature Needs:

  1. Ability to "Add More" - there is already a feature where you can add more of a type in the library, but it doesn't currently work for text fields. We'll play around with this.
  2. Tally over specific fields - per conversation, this might have to be a separate function that runs on the config to gather that info before submitting. Currently, USFS has a function that transforms the config into data for submission, so the custom function might happen at this stage.
  3. Link to external page in instructions - Need to be able to launch a page via the Instructions. Sounds like the way to do this is via the existing feature to add custom content wherever you need in the config. Potential solution: create a custom component that would include explanatory text and a link to a separate page, and render that from the config.
  4. Upload Documents - I-912 requires requestor upload supporting materials in many sections. There is already a feature in discovery - tracking here
  5. State Dropdown - Sounds like there is already a State option in the library. We'll see whether this works for our purposes!
  6. Read-only Review Page - Post-form completion, we'd like the ability to review information gathered in a read-only way. Does this already exist? @annekainicUSDS is confirming.
  7. Download Documents - third party signers will need to download an (empty) form, fill it out, sign it, and upload it. Note for @sharmaneil - If we can populate this PDF with json blob info first, that would be amazing, but not required.

cc/ @benwarfield-usds @mlighdc @iamandrewmiller-usds

@kaschm-usds
Copy link
Author

kaschm-usds commented Jun 8, 2018

@annekainicUSDS - Talked to DHS folks about e-signature requirements. Looks like we need four components:

  1. Download PDF [talked to @ju-liem - this is ok!]
  2. Upload PDF [already reflected in item 4]
  3. Checkbox [ok!]
  4. Conditional text field [ok!]

Thanks!

@ju-liem ju-liem added [type] enhancement New feature or request [practice] engineering Engineering related work [practice] product Product related work labels Jun 8, 2018
@ju-liem
Copy link
Contributor

ju-liem commented Jun 8, 2018

@kaschm-usds Let's talk about the Download Documents functionality. Pinging you now about it.

@jcmeloni-usds
Copy link
Contributor

Some of these may end up being outside the bounds of the USFS and have to do with construction of the app around the form, so def we need to discuss and then break this list into actionable issues when they're determined to be actionable.

@jcmeloni-usds jcmeloni-usds removed the [practice] engineering Engineering related work label Jun 25, 2018
@jcmeloni-usds
Copy link
Contributor

Assigning to @ju-liem to review. For each:

  • determine to do or not to do
  • if not to do, note why
  • if to do, create ticket w/ description and acceptance criteria, then prioritize in eng backlog.
  • close this when all are addressed in new tickets or wont-fix determinations

@ju-liem
Copy link
Contributor

ju-liem commented Jul 5, 2018

Closing. All of the requested capabilities in this issue are either already accounted for in some way, or exist in another way within the library.

@ju-liem ju-liem closed this as completed Jul 5, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[practice] product Product related work [type] enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants