Skip to content

UX: surface Santa Teresa comparison and official CBP report - #147

Merged
sbc1-code merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/santa-teresa-planning-actions-20261023
Oct 23, 2026
Merged

sbc1-code merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/santa-teresa-planning-actions-20261023

Conversation

@sbc1-code

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

The Santa Teresa crossing page places its existing walk-or-drive link below the hourly chart, FAQ and nearby crossings. Its CBP source link opens the generic site. This moves the comparison action above the wait card and adds the official Santa Teresa CBP BWT report, in English and Spanish.

Before: users must scroll past the planning sections to find the comparison and navigate CBP again to find this port. After: both actions are on the first screen with keyboard access, visible labels and minimum 44px targets. The old comparison link location is removed for this port.

Refs #64 and #62; keeps both broader issues open. Draft only; no production merge/deployment.

Validation:

  • Fresh build and complete npm test PASS: 133 unit tests and 398 manifest browser navigations.
  • EN/ES browser QA PASS at 1440×900, 390×844, 360×800 and 320×568. The main wait remains visible on the first screen at the tested desktop/390px/360px sizes.
  • Regression covers keyboard order, official new tab/null opener, Back, report aging past 90 minutes without a successful refresh, recovery, absent pedestrian/both waits, genuine zero, closure and unrelated-port exclusion.
  • Synthetic 60/30 before/after and unavailable-data screenshots retained. The test checks the existing honest comparison, including its walking overhead, without requiring a recommendation for a tie.
  • The official BWT page rendered HTTP200. Published hours are not copied or changed; the existing hours-source discrepancy remains unresolved.
  • Existing 62 KiB JS / 20 KiB CSS checks pass. No dependency, audit-exception, report, timestamp, calculation, threshold, inventory or metadata changes. Existing no-JavaScript snapshot remains intact.

Four files, +170/−1. Head: e76f3764d9718436f02e3f40669fc361d4a412ca.

@sbc1-code
sbc1-code marked this pull request as ready for review October 23, 2026 04:52
@sbc1-code
sbc1-code merged commit ef7e990 into main Oct 23, 2026
2 checks passed

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Released and verified on the public canonical domain.

  • Merge/source: ef7e99052108e90987566cd7d452cf0312a0ca9c (reviewed head e76f3764d9718436f02e3f40669fc361d4a412ca). The merge tree matches the green PR integration tree; collector updates were preserved.
  • Automatic production workflow 39902684118: SUCCESS. Build and release checks passed: 133 unit tests, 398 manifest navigations and both EN/ES Santa Teresa regressions. Entry JS 61.87/62 KiB gzip, CSS 19.11/20 KiB; budgets unchanged.
  • Production deployment: dpl_7pkPNJYfHfsgbBqm2ZDa3C6c2bgn, deployment URL. Apex and www aliases confirmed; the public /data/publication.json served the exact merge SHA before and after QA.
  • Public crossing page and comparison page: HTTP 200, self canonicals, one sitemap entry each. Loaded production detail/comparison modules verified.
  • Isolated headless QA: EN/ES at 1440×900, 390×844 and 320×568. First-screen actions, targets at least 44px, one comparison link, native comparison navigation and Back passed. The actual report correctly showed no current pedestrian wait reported.
  • Controlled reports against the served frontend also passed keyboard/new-tab/no-opener, fresh comparison, aging past the existing limit during failed refresh, recovery, absent waits/hours, genuine zero, closure and unrelated-port exclusion. External navigation used a fixture; no live CBP login or external message was sent. Browser closed; no shared browser used.

Four-file scope only. No hours claim or freshness rule changed. Two pre-existing moderate dependency entries remain; no audit exception or security setting changed. Rollback, if needed, is a reviewed git revert -m 1 ef7e99052108e90987566cd7d452cf0312a0ca9c on a new branch from then-current main, followed by the existing checks and publication workflow; not applied. Broader issues #64/#62 remain open.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant