Configure fields and data for HLR form v3

[caseywilliams]

Summary

Adds blank form, fields, and data for the new version 3 of the Higher-Level Review form. This is part 1 of 2 - it does not change any API behavior yet.

Version 3 of this form is mostly the same as version 2 except for a few aspects, none of which were deemed imporatant enough to warrant a new version of the HLR API itself:

1. Removal of the SOC/SSOC review checkbox - soon, it will no longer be possible to opt out of this process, so the option will be considered true by default
2. A few minor spacing changes

Related issue(s)

• API-22858

Testing done

• Added test cases based on previous version of the form + new ones to further validate phone number handling

What areas of the site does it impact?

None yet - these changes will be used in my next PR.

Acceptance criteria

• I fixed|updated|added unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
• No error nor warning in the console.
• Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
• Documentation has been updated (link to documentation)
• No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
• Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog or Grafana (if applicable)
• If app impacted requires authentication, did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected
• I added a screenshot of the developed feature

[github-actions]

1 Warning

⚠️

This PR changes 494 LoC (not counting whitespace/newlines). In order to ensure each PR receives the proper attention it deserves, we recommend not exceeding 200. Expect some delays getting reviews. File Summary Files modules/appeals_api/app/services/appeals_api/pdf_construction/higher_level_review/v3/form_data.rb (+247/-0) modules/appeals_api/app/services/appeals_api/pdf_construction/higher_level_review/v3/form_fields.rb (+77/-0) modules/appeals_api/spec/services/appeals_api/pdf_construction/higher_level_review/v3/form_data_spec.rb (+170/-0) Note: We exclude files matching the following when considering PR size: *.csv, *.json, *.tsv, *.txt, Gemfile.lock, app/swagger, modules/mobile/docs, spec/fixtures/, spec/support/vcr_cassettes/, modules/mobile/spec/support/vcr_cassettes/, db/seeds, modules/vaos/app/docs, modules/meb_api/app/docs, modules/appeals_api/app/swagger/ Big PRs are difficult to review, often become stale, and cause delays.

Generated by 🚫 Danger

[caseywilliams]

Oof, looks like I exceeded the line limit even though I broke this out into two PRs... I'll remove some content

[caseywilliams]

I omitted the rep signature fields because of this comment on v2 of the HLR form

[caseywilliams]

I didn't see any handling for veteran or claimant phone extensions in v2 of this form, so I handled them the same way as in the Supplemental Claim form v3 I was just working on (#11866) - the international field will be used for a domestic number if there's an extension

[caseywilliams]

The benefit type field for this form is weird - nothing has changed since v2 of the form, but as a reminder: each radio button in this conceptual "field" actually has its own unique field name, and the valid value for these fields varies. Unlike other unique radio buttons in our forms where 1 consistently means 'yes' and Off means 'no', the benefit type fields here require different numbers to indicate 'yes', although all use Off for 'no'.

[kristen-brown]

This looks good to me! With that said, I'm not very familiar with the PDF construction code yet, so @cilestin or @michelpmcdonald would probably be more thorough reviewers on this one. I'll comment rather than explicitly approve so that they can chime in.