[Don't merge yet] Feature/5243 remove map and zip election search

[rfultz]

Summary

• Resolves Implement design changes for election search, data landing and homepage to add missing feature message #5243

Deactivating

Required reviewers

Feel free to remove yourselves—I tagged everyone

• Front-end for functionality and approach
• UX for functionality and look and feel
• Content for language, especially:
  • I capped ZIP since it's an acronym and AP does
  • Merriam-Webster says 'reenabled' isn't a word so I hyphenated it, but I'm not a fan of the connection that 'enabled' has with 'disabled'
• Content for typos

Impacted areas of the application

• Election searches on the homepage, data landing page, and election search page

Screenshots

Homepage, smallest

Homepage, widest

Data landing page, smallest

Data landing page, widest

Election search, smallest, ZIP search

Election search, smallest, map/message

Election search, widest

How to test

Content, feel free to review these screenshots.
Otherwise,

• pull the branch
• npm i
• npm run build
• ./manage.py runserver
• Check the homepage across widths
• Check the data landing page across widths
• Check the election search page across widths
• Presidential candidate map should be unaffected (still fully functional)
• Raising by the number map should be unaffected (still fully functional)

Known issues / questions

• I really like don't like the way the widest data landing page looks. Our default grid offers us 100% column, 50%, 33.33%, and 25%—we aren't using 7/12 columns anywhere. @JonellaCulmer?
• Removing the map has broken the district pull-down filtering. (i.e. selecting a state would update the map, which would then update choices for districts but now we don't have the map so it can't update, so the districts never get refreshed/filtered). @patphongs is working on a fix.
• Tests aren't failing and it seems like they should be

[dorothyyeager]

Hi @rfultz I can take a deeper look later but really quick, ZIP is fine. It's also GPO style so this is how it appears when it appears on H4CC pages. Maybe we should add it to the content guide. (Updated: I've added it to the guide.)

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 75.08%. Comparing base (41bab73) to head (22e46d4).
Report is 597 commits behind head on develop.

❗ Current head 22e46d4 differs from pull request most recent head a4122e2. Consider uploading reports for the commit a4122e2 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #5282   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    75.08%   75.08%           
========================================
  Files          125      125           
  Lines         8131     8131           
  Branches       648      648           
========================================
  Hits          6105     6105           
  Misses        2026     2026           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[JonellaCulmer]

@rfultz I don't like the widest view of the data landing page either. Can stack the search filters below the message? Or do you have a preferred solution.

Tagging @dorothyyeager @kathycarothers @djgarr in case the preferred solution involves a language change on this page.

[dorothyyeager]

From content perspective: re-enable is OK to be hyphenated based on this GPO Style manual guidance: "Use a hyphen or hyphens to prevent mispronunciation, to ensure a definite accent on each element of the compound, or to avoid ambiguity." The examples demonstrate that when you mean "(verb) again" you should put it as "re-'verb'."

That said, if you want an alternative verb, you could go with "re-implement."

Everything else checks out content-wise.

[djgarr]

Looks good to me

[rfultz]

@JonellaCulmer, this seems less awful. Not a fan of the gap under the raising & spending callouts on the larger widths.

[rfultz]

@johnnyporkchops @JonellaCulmer @patphongs, any concerns?

[patphongs]

@rfultz I think the changes are ok, but I don't want to merge it quite yet since the dropdowns aren't functional yet. That's proving fairly challenging.

[rfultz]

@rfultz I think the changes are ok, but I don't want to merge it quite yet since the dropdowns aren't functional yet. That's proving fairly challenging.

Oh yeah…

[rfultz]

@JonellaCulmer should we just close this?