Design System and Shared Components Improvements

[ybidois]

Overview

Explain the topic in 2 sentences

Improve the Catena-X Design System and the Portal Shared Components

What's the benefit?

Improve overall design of Portal and increase speed to ship new functionalities

What are the Risks/Dependencies ?

No dependencies

Detailed explanation

Current implementation

Proposed improvements

• Improve Carousel component
• Improve/create new Card component
• Enrich components with missing MUI ones
• Remove inline styling
• Make components smaller
• Better manage states
• Better manage query and data passed to components

Feature Team

Contributor

• @saadanzari
• @Usmanfee
• @JordanGerada3
• @ss-nikunj
• @shubhamv-ss
• @ybidois

Committer

• @oyo

User Stories

• Issue 1, linked to specific repository
• Issue 2, linked to another specific repository

Acceptance Criteria

• Criteria 1
• Criteria 2
• Criteria 3

Test Cases

Test Case 1

Steps

1. Do something
2. Click something
3. Add something

Expected Result

1. Expectation
2. Expectation
3. Expectation

Architectural Relevance

The following items are ensured (answer: yes) after this issue is implemented:

• This feature aligns with our current architectural guidelines
  • Data Sovereignty: All data sharing activities across company boundaries follow the Catena-X Regulatory Framework, in particular the Data Exchange Governance, and the Dataspace Protocol via a compliant Connector (like the tractusx-edc or similar, see Connector KIT)
    • CX-0010 Business Partner Number
    • CX-0013 Identity of Member Companies
    • CX-0018 Data Space Connectivity (EDC)
    • CX-0049 DID Document Schema
    • CX-0050 Framework Agreement Credential
    • CX-0149 Verified Company Identity
  • Interoperability: Digital Twins are used (compliant to the Digital Twin KIT and the Industry Core KIT)
    • CX-0001 EDC Discovery API
    • CX-0002 Digital Twins in Catena-X
    • CX-0018 Data Space Connectivity (EDC)
  • Data Format:
    • The data model is based on a published Semantic Model
• The impact on the overall system architecture has been assessed. The Feature does not require changes to the architecture or any existing standard? Please have a look here on the overarching architecture
• Potential risks or conflicts with existing architecture has been assessed

Justification: (Fill this out, if at least one of the checkboxes above cannot be ticked. Contact the Architecture Management Committee to get an approval for the justification)

Additional information

• I am aware that my request may not be developed if no developer can be found for it. I'll try to contribute a developer (bring your own developer)

[stephanbcbauer]

Some hints from Release Management (@ther3sa) and Tractus-X Project Lead (@stephanbcbauer)

• Status currently in Inbox. ⇾ Only features with status backlog are considered in open planning
• Please add missing sections from the feature template, or fill them out
• Please add contributor and committer

[ss-nikunj]

Hi @oyo,

I suggest that we add Unit Test Cases for the portal-shared-component. That will help us maintain our repository and reduce future bugs.

Library Suggestions:

• Vitest (https://vitest.dev/)

Thank you!

[evegufy]

Committers:
@oyo
@ntruchsess
@Phil91
@evegufy

[stephanbcbauer]

@tom-rm-meyer-ISST mentioned if a migration guide would be needed? ⇾ part of discussion

[saadanzari]

I have a few more suggestions that we can incorporate while doing this ticket

eclipse-tractusx/portal-frontend#1431
eclipse-tractusx/portal-frontend#1430
eclipse-tractusx/portal-frontend#1428
eclipse-tractusx/portal-frontend#1427
eclipse-tractusx/portal-frontend#1426
eclipse-tractusx/portal-frontend#1425