-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
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
UI Design: Results Table of BTR Search #19559
Comments
@steveburtch revised flow is here: https://whimsical.com/competent-authority-all-access-search-flow-8MpwUHKQb7QB81CBjArq6W Who needs to review the flow of the all access before I put together the wires for the results since we have those couple of questions listed? |
@steveburtch @mstanton1 I'm unclear if we need all this info on the business side or potentially we could combine the business numbers together in one column. I'm also not sure if we need to list the SI names here too? Or would they be in the same column as the business controlled bits? There are also 2 dates - I'm assuming they are different things (one being the effective dates of the business and then other being the effective dates of the ownership parties?) but let me know if that's not the case. |
@J-Baese the numbers are both quite different. One is a BC Reg identifier (Incorporation/Registration Number) and the other is a BN which is a CRA number. To the comment on dates, effective date would be the date that they specify the significant individual change took place. They may file with the registries a few months after somebody had that control. Again, both are important - but it's not clear if they should both show in this table. I agree though, that this might be overkill and also means a lot of filtering / view update functionality for those who want to customize their table to reduce horizontal scrolling. @steveburtch has there been any user research to guide what fields clients want to search by? Or is this based upon what we currently have with business or director search hence moving forward with the existing pattern? I wonder if we can scale this down or dig in to make sure what we're doing is what clients really want? @mstanton1 @J-Baese the only really important thing users would want in this context is the list of SIs. I think there may be some confusion between the Business Search as it exists as a separate product and the Search by Business feature on this Person and Business Search. We don't need to show too much of the business info in this view, maybe we just link to the business search entry like we currently do in director search, if we want to provide them with more business info? |
@J-Baese @mstanton1 in the Search by business there is a Business Controlled column that should not be there. I'm checking the original field requirements. @Apt766525 do you have list of the fields that should be returned by the Search by Business handy? |
Here are the fields from the requirements: Search by business - Data visible in the search results for business:
|
Looks great! Let's target grooming this in our next session (Tuesday the 27th at 2 PM) @steveburtch |
Agreed! looks great. |
Thank you @J-Baese. It looks like the team cadence is to only groom once a week but we should probably look at another grooming session to ensure we have some of this sized up for the next sprint. I will work with @fodiley and @steveburtch Monday AM to see if we can set something up. |
@mstanton1 yes we can close this |
Control/Influence icons here: https://www.figma.com/file/JLmhc9QFKtAXijXsyTCSR8/Business-%26-Person-Search?type=design&node-id=79%3A3813&mode=design&t=Ad5KiLANcfv0MILI-1
Mocks here: https://www.figma.com/file/JLmhc9QFKtAXijXsyTCSR8/Business-%26-Person-Search?type=design&node-id=0%3A1&mode=design&t=Ad5KiLANcfv0MILI-1
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: