Misc Issues Identified in the Facilities App

[ravilodhi]

Current behavior

The following issues were encountered while creating a facility in the Facility App. These need to be addressed to ensure accurate and complete facility information:

Issues:
Missing Contact Email Address Field
Description: There is no option to add a contact email address while adding contact details for a facility.
Impact: Email is a critical communication medium, and its absence limits the ability to record complete contact details for the facility.

Incorrect Formatting of Contact Number on OMS Facility Details Page
Description: When a contact number is added via the Facility App, it appears incorrectly formatted on the OMS Facility Details page. For example,
+1-3058301957 is displayed as ++1-3058301957.
Impact: Misformatted contact numbers can cause confusion and lead to failed communication attempts.

Owner ID Missing in the App
Description: While creating a facility via CSV, the Owner-party-ID can be added. However, there is no option to add the Owner-party-ID directly from the app interface.
Impact: This inconsistency between CSV uploads and app-based creation hampers the ability to maintain uniformity and completeness in facility data.

Expected behavior

Steps to reproduce the issue

Can you handle fixing this bug by yourself?

• YES
• NO

Environment details

• Browser:
• OS:
• Code Version:

Additional information

[R-Sourabh]

For Owner ID Missing in the App :
As I checked, the ownerPartyId is being passed by default from the app side when creating a facility.

[priyanshee1604]

ISSUES: Number validation is not implemented for the phone number field, allowing users to enter character values.
Opened a new issue for the same: #341

[priyanshee1604]

Verified and confirmed that the following issues are resolved:

1. Contact Email Address field is now available during facility creation.
2. The correct format of the contact number is displayed on the OMS Facility Details page.
3. "Owner ID Missing in the App": This idea was dropped as per the discussion and hence not implemented.