fix: Fix scrollable elements in Policy pages.

[Krishna2323]

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #37782
PROPOSAL: #37782 (comment)

Tests

For devices with width greater than 800px

1. Open collect workspace from workspaces page
2. Open Members, Distance rates, Categories, Tags and Taxes page.
3. On each page scroll the options list and verify it does scroll correctly

For devices with width less than 800px

1. Open collect workspace from workspaces page
2. Open Members, Distance rates, Categories, Tags and Taxes page.
3. On each page scroll the options list
4. Verify the page description on top and the thead scrolls and buttons are fixed.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

For devices with width greater than 800px

1. Open collect workspace from workspaces page
2. Open Members, Distance rates, Categories, Tags and Taxes page.
3. On each page scroll the options list and verify it does scroll correctly

For devices with width less than 800px

1. Open collect workspace from workspaces page
2. Open Members, Distance rates, Categories, Tags and Taxes page.
3. On each page scroll the options list
4. Verify the page description on top and the thead scrolls and buttons are fixed.

QA Steps

For devices with width greater than 800px

1. Open collect workspace from workspaces page
2. Open Members, Distance rates, Categories, Tags and Taxes page.
3. On each page scroll the options list and verify it does scroll correctly

For devices with width less than 800px

1. Open collect workspace from workspaces page
2. Open Members, Distance rates, Categories, Tags and Taxes page.
3. On each page scroll the options list
4. Verify the page description on top and the thead scrolls and buttons are fixed.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android_native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android_chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

ios_native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios_safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web_chrome.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

desktop_app.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@akinwale Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[Krishna2323]

@shawnborton #37782 (comment), do you have something to suggest here? it would be great if we clear things before I start implementing it on other pages since we need to handle multiple pages, eg: tags, categories, taxes, distance, etc etc.

demo_scrollheader_list.mp4

[shawnborton]

Thanks for the video! cc @Expensify/design for visibility

One thing that would be nice, but would be more difficult - it would be cool if the entire page was able to scroll below the header area, but as soon as the table column header row (thead) was about to scroll out of view, it would stay fixed to the top. This way the description can scroll away so you get a little more viewport height to use. Does that make sense, and is that doable?

[Krishna2323]

@shawnborton, my apologies for the delay. I encountered some difficulties over the past few days while attempting to implement your suggestions. However, I believe I've finally managed to grasp it. Could you please confirm if this is what you meant?

sticky_thead.mp4

[shawnborton]

Exactly! Though it looks like the thead has an incorrect BG color?

[Krishna2323]

@shawnborton, Yep, I just added white as bg for testing because it was transparent and hard to see in demo video. Will update that. Thanks.

One more thing I would suggest is that we should scroll to the top when the user selects all by using the checkbox in the thead. This way, they can see the dropdown button to delete/disable/enable categories/tags/etc.

[Krishna2323]

@shawnborton, could you please tell me what background to use for the sticky header? The application's background is set to darkMode: rgba(6,27,9,0.92) and lightMode: rgba(252, 251, 249, 0.92). I applied the same background to the header, but the options are still visible when the header overlaps them because of the opacity set to.92.

stickyheader_demo.mp4

[shawnborton]

Whoa - no idea why the opacity is reduced. Can we just remove that and make it so that it uses a 100% opacity background?

[Krishna2323]

yep, we can create a new variable for that to use the same bg color with full opacity, will share screenshots after making changes.

[shawnborton]

Do we need a new variable? It should just be the same as the appBG right?

[Krishna2323]

Sorry for the confusion, I was lost in elements tab. We are using 252, 251, 249 with full opacity for the app. You can ignore the issue I mentioned above.

[Krishna2323]

Code changes are completed, will do final testing and add recordings for review.

[Krishna2323]

Facing a weird issue :(, the LHS is not displayed when visiting any policy settings page. Will try again later.

no_sidebar.mp4

[shawnborton]

Looks like we have some conflicts.

[shawnborton]

Hmm I am out of ideas then. At this point, maybe we should just make this part of the view fixed:

And everything else can scroll under it. Thoughts?

[Krishna2323]

@shawnborton, IMO making the buttons stick to the top, instead of select all rows thead, makes more sense for a few reasons:

1. If a user wants to select all, they can easily do so without scrolling.
2. Consider this scenario: If a user wants to check if a category/option is present, they can scroll and search. If they want to add it, they can use the fixed buttons instead of scrolling all the way back up (if the buttons aren't fixed).

[shawnborton]

Yeah, that makes sense to me and I think it's a good compromise.

[Krishna2323]

@akinwale, code is updated according to the discussion above, you can start the review. Recordings will be updated in few moments.

[Krishna2323]

@akinwale recordings are updated. @shawnborton can you pls verify the behaviour in the recording below.

android_native.mp4

[shawnborton]

That feels pretty good to me. Thoughts @Expensify/design?

[dannymcclain]

Yeah I think that feels pretty good.

[dubielzyk-expensify]

LGTM too!

[Krishna2323]

@akinwale, bump for review.

[akinwale]

Reviewing today.

[akinwale]

Reviewer Checklist

• I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
• I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
  • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
  • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
  • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
• I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
• I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
  • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
  • The file is named correctly
  • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
  • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
  • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
  • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
  • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
  • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

38719-android-native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

38719-android-chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

38719-ios-native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

38719-ios-safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

38719-web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

38719-desktop.mp4

[akinwale]

LGTM.

[flodnv]

Why is ListHeaderComponent CamelCase instead of listHeaderComponent as lowerCamelCase?

Additionally, I see headerContent, footerContent, and listFooterContent, so should this be named listHeaderContent for consistency?

[Krishna2323]

@flodnv, thanks for the catch, that makes sense to me, now updated to listHeaderContent

[Krishna2323]

@flodnv, friendly bump to merge this.

[Krishna2323]

@flodnv, bump ^

[akinwale]

@Krishna2323 I believe the merge freeze is still active.

[flodnv]

Unfortunately, that's correct

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 1.4.76-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 1.4.76-7 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅