Merged PR 2401: docs: document representation participation availability model
docs: document representation participation availability model Related work items: #23754
This commit is contained in:
Robert Bond
@@ -18,6 +18,41 @@ Follow-ups:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### CL-2026-06-18-RPA-DOCS: representation participation availability documentation + context update
|
||||
|
||||
date: 2026-06-18
|
||||
author: Cline
|
||||
scope: `docs/representation-participation-availability.md`, `docs/representation-participation-business-review.md`, `context/current-platform-state.md`, `memory-bank/{techContext,productContext,open-questions,change-log}.md`
|
||||
type: change
|
||||
rationale: Preserve the completed Representation Participation Availability investigation in repository documentation and project context so future contributors do not need to repeat the same discovery work.
|
||||
impact: Documentation/context only; improves architectural clarity and business-validation readiness; no runtime, auth, i18n, or API behaviour change.
|
||||
status: completed
|
||||
|
||||
Summary:
|
||||
|
||||
- Added first-class technical documentation for Representation Participation Availability.
|
||||
- Added a plain-English business review document for product/business/SME validation.
|
||||
- Updated platform and memory-bank context to record:
|
||||
- the stream as complete from a technical discovery/documentation perspective
|
||||
- the architectural conclusion that representation participation is one coherent decision model with layered exceptions
|
||||
- the current state as awaiting business validation before further representation-policy adoption/expansion/change work
|
||||
- the next likely discovery candidate: Case Lifecycle / Status Decision Model Discovery
|
||||
- Added a concise open-questions entry pointing business stakeholders to the new review/technical documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
Validation:
|
||||
|
||||
- Documentation/context update only.
|
||||
- No application code changed.
|
||||
- No tests changed.
|
||||
- Lint/tests skipped because this was documentation-only work.
|
||||
|
||||
Follow-ups:
|
||||
|
||||
- Review `docs/representation-participation-business-review.md` with business stakeholders.
|
||||
- Do not broaden representation-policy boundaries further until validation outcomes are agreed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### CL-22541: breadcrumb/back-link route-state helper extraction (`va/adv/ads/key`)
|
||||
|
||||
date: 2026-04-09
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -88,3 +88,37 @@ Technical lead + DevOps owner
|
||||
|
||||
Decision deadline:
|
||||
Before runtime-affecting refactor or next deployment process update
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Q-004: Representation Participation Availability business validation
|
||||
|
||||
date: 2026-06-18
|
||||
author: Cline
|
||||
scope: representation participation availability across summary/search/domain policy
|
||||
type: question
|
||||
rationale: Technical characterization is complete, but several compatibility-sensitive behaviours may be historical rather than intentional and need business confirmation before any further representation-policy adoption or behaviour change work.
|
||||
impact: User-facing participation availability, blocked messaging, cross-portal consistency, and future domain-boundary decisions.
|
||||
status: open
|
||||
|
||||
Question:
|
||||
Which current representation participation behaviours are intended business rules, and which are historical compatibility behaviours only?
|
||||
|
||||
Needed from:
|
||||
Product owner + business analyst + relevant SME/CRM data owner
|
||||
|
||||
Decision deadline:
|
||||
Before any further representation-policy adoption, expansion, normalization, or behavioural change work
|
||||
|
||||
Current context:
|
||||
|
||||
- Technical characterization and documentation are now recorded in:
|
||||
- `docs/representation-participation-availability.md`
|
||||
- `docs/representation-participation-business-review.md`
|
||||
- Business validation is especially needed for:
|
||||
- Rights of Way behaviour when process information is incomplete or stored differently
|
||||
- Advertisement behaviour when process information is incomplete or conflicting
|
||||
- whether all portal areas should behave consistently
|
||||
- Householder blocked-message suppression
|
||||
- CPO ended-message / deadline consistency
|
||||
- missing or conflicting process information handling
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -27,9 +27,25 @@
|
||||
|
||||
- Case summary UI varies by appeal type and case attributes.
|
||||
- Representation actions are conditionally shown by appeal type, role, and date windows.
|
||||
- Representation participation now appears to form one broader business decision model: whether a participant can engage in representation or consultation activity for a case at that point in the process.
|
||||
- Locale-sensitive behavior affects links, routes, labels, and email template choice.
|
||||
- New-case-reference notifications include preferred-language checks before template selection.
|
||||
|
||||
## Current representation participation state
|
||||
|
||||
- Technical discovery/documentation for Representation Participation Availability is complete.
|
||||
- The current behaviour is best understood as a coherent participation-availability policy with layered appeal-type, process-type, participant-type, consultation, and date-window exceptions.
|
||||
- Business validation is still required before any further representation-policy adoption, expansion, or behavioural change work.
|
||||
- Reference documents:
|
||||
- `docs/representation-participation-availability.md`
|
||||
- `docs/representation-participation-business-review.md`
|
||||
|
||||
## Likely next discovery candidate
|
||||
|
||||
- Case Lifecycle / Status Decision Model Discovery
|
||||
- expected focus: case progress, stages, statuses, closed states, dashboard grouping, and lifecycle messaging
|
||||
- should be treated as discovery-only pending review of the new representation participation documentation
|
||||
|
||||
## Important user-facing behaviors
|
||||
|
||||
- Welsh route aliases are mapped in `next.config.js` and must remain in sync with page behavior.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -43,6 +43,18 @@
|
||||
- Formatting conventions from `.prettierrc`: 4 spaces, no trailing commas.
|
||||
- Prisma client generation script available: `npm run prisma:generate`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Current domain documentation status
|
||||
|
||||
- Representation Participation Availability has now been documented as a first-class technical domain characterization.
|
||||
- Technical source-of-truth:
|
||||
- `docs/representation-participation-availability.md`
|
||||
- Business validation companion:
|
||||
- `docs/representation-participation-business-review.md`
|
||||
- Current architectural conclusion:
|
||||
- representation participation is best understood as one coherent decision model with layered exceptions
|
||||
- known consumer divergences and CRM compatibility behaviours are part of the current live contract
|
||||
- future technical adoption/expansion work should wait for business validation before changing behaviour or broadening policy boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
## CI/CD and deployment artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
- `azure-pipelines.yml` exists (legacy-looking Node 10 build pipeline).
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user