fix(translation): show correct error message for bank account flow by jaydamani · Pull Request #58764 · Expensify/App

jaydamani · 2025-03-19T19:58:13Z

Explanation of Change

Update bank account form to show too many attempts reached error when reimbursementAccount?.maxAttemptsReached is true

Fixed Issues

$ #57423
PROPOSAL: #57423 (comment)

Tests

Go to https://staging.new.expensify.com/home
Go to workspace settings - workflow - complete manual flow
Enter invalid transaction and make appear max. attempt tried message
Navigate back to workspace settings page
Note error is displayed
Go to settings and change language to Spanish
Navigate back to workspace settings page
Note error is not changed to Spanish

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2025-03-19T19:58:18Z

@brunovjk 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]

brunovjk · 2025-03-19T23:03:47Z

@jaydamani The warning in Spanish is fine:

However, the validation error does not remain. I believe it should be returned by the backend, does that make sense?

Screen.Recording.2025-03-19.at.19.57.41.mov

Thanks.

jaydamani · 2025-03-20T16:53:36Z

However, the validation error does not remain. I believe it should be returned by the backend, does that make sense?

looking into this, also just noticed that the cross for dismissing the error is not working so checking that as well. If we want to always show the error then I think the cross should be hidden for our particular error

brunovjk · 2025-03-21T12:01:19Z

looking into this, also just noticed that the cross for dismissing the error is not working so checking that as well. If we want to always show the error then I think the cross should be hidden for our particular error

I believe so, but we need confirmation from the @Expensify/design team.

dannymcclain · 2025-03-21T13:11:30Z

looking into this, also just noticed that the cross for dismissing the error is not working so checking that as well. If we want to always show the error then I think the cross should be hidden for our particular error

If the error is dismissable then we should show the x and make it dismiss the error. If the error needs to be persistent, then we don't need to show the x.

If we don't allow the user to dismiss it, will the error go away on its own once they can try to validate again?

dubielzyk-expensify · 2025-03-24T02:39:05Z

Agree with what Danny is saying and asking.

Would also be good to add some top padding to the error as it's a bit cramped at the moment

shawnborton · 2025-03-24T19:39:31Z

Agree with all of those comments from the design team.

brunovjk · 2025-03-24T22:43:39Z

If the error is dismissable then we should show the x and make it dismiss the error. If the error needs to be persistent, then we don't need to show the x.

If we don't allow the user to dismiss it, will the error go away on its own once they can try to validate again?

Thank you very much design team. @justinpersaud can you confirm the expected behavior here? Thanks

justinpersaud · 2025-03-25T23:56:18Z

However, the validation error does not remain. I believe it should be returned by the backend, does that make sense?

Do you mean the bank account validation error does not persist after you refreshed the page, and you were able to try adding it in manually again? If so, I agree, that is an issue. I believe in this case we expect the user to contact us to resolve the problem and they shouldn't be able to get around that.

brunovjk · 2025-03-26T13:56:42Z

Do you mean the bank account validation error does not persist after you refreshed the page, and you were able to try adding it in manually again?

Exactly @justinpersaud. And that should come from the backend, right? Or do you think there is something we can do on the front end? Thanks.

justinpersaud · 2025-03-26T15:15:42Z

So the error is going to persist even if you try and refresh the page and try again. You'll get the same error.

The error message we're showing right now is actually what the backend is returning

Validation for this bank account has been disabled due to too many incorrect attempts. Please contact us.

I asked internally and it seems like we're fine with this behaviour since you'll still be blocked.

brunovjk · 2025-03-26T18:57:48Z

Great! Let us know when is confirmed. Thank you very much 🚀

justinpersaud · 2025-03-26T19:00:08Z

Was that to me? What I posted above is already confirmed.

jaydamani · 2025-03-26T19:39:24Z

I believe in this case we expect the user to contact us to resolve the problem

Then I think we should also have some message asking user to contact us.

justinpersaud · 2025-03-26T20:27:26Z

It's already there in the violation notice.

brunovjk · 2025-03-26T21:41:56Z

Was that to me? What I posted above is already confirmed.

Sorry, I misunderstood hehehe great than

brunovjk · 2025-03-29T12:33:34Z

Hi @jaydamani, could you merge main here? So I can test it, the Android build is falling here. Thanks.

…-bank-account-flow--57423

jaydamani · 2025-03-29T13:14:20Z

@brunovjk Merged with main, let me know if any updates are required

brunovjk · 2025-03-31T13:23:48Z

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 that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
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 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.ts 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.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
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

58764_ios_native.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

58764_android_web.mov

iOS: Native

58764_ios_native.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

58764_ios_web.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-03-31.at.09.16.20.mov

MacOS: Desktop

58764_web_desktop.mov

brunovjk

LGTM. I believe we need to confirm from the @Expensify/design team. Thanks.

justinpersaud · 2025-03-31T14:03:47Z

src/pages/ReimbursementAccount/VerifiedBankAccountFlowEntryPoint.tsx

+                                reimbursementAccount?.maxAttemptsReached ? getMicroSecondOnyxErrorWithTranslationKey('connectBankAccountStep.maxAttemptsReached') : getLatestError(errors)
+                            }
                            shouldShowErrorMessages
+                            canDismissError={!reimbursementAccount?.maxAttemptsReached}


@Expensify/design what do you think about this change? This is making the error persistent and not allowing you to dismiss it. I'd argue that you can dismiss the error after you've seen it, then that is on you because you saw it and dismissed it. The error will still be presented when they try to setup the bank account again on a different screen.

Hmm I don't feel too strongly. Normally we allow users to dismiss the error, although in this case, if you dismiss the error, the buttons would still be disabled which might feel weird right?

So I think I would keep it there as not dismissable. What makes it so that you can log in again though?

This is for adding a bank account. So in this case, we're showing an error because they've already failed too many times to add a bank account, and their next step is to reach out to Concierge.

If they dismiss the error, they can go through the flow again but then they'll hit the same error page. I think in that case, making it non dismissable is fine since the outcome is the same, right?

shawnborton · 2025-03-31T14:37:17Z

I think we could use a little bit of space above the error message. Can you give it a topMargin of 8px and see how that feels?

jaydamani · 2025-03-31T15:25:01Z

@shawnborton

shawnborton · 2025-03-31T15:39:55Z

Nice, that feels better - curious if @Expensify/design agrees (though I think they will!)

shawnborton · 2025-03-31T15:40:20Z

(Also noting that we're updating the option rows shown here but in a different PR)

dubielzyk-expensify · 2025-04-01T01:23:26Z

Nice, that feels better - curious if @Expensify/design agrees (though I think they will!)

Agree 👍

brunovjk · 2025-04-01T12:37:34Z

Great! I think is all yours @justinpersaud. Thank you.

OSBotify · 2025-04-01T12:56:45Z

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

github-actions · 2025-04-01T15:38:46Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/justinpersaud in version: 9.1.22-0 🚀

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

github-actions · 2025-04-03T11:40:08Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.1.22-10 🚀

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

fix(translation): show correct error message for bank account flow

dba1693

jaydamani requested a review from a team as a code owner March 19, 2025 19:58

melvin-bot bot requested review from brunovjk and removed request for a team March 19, 2025 19:58

prettier

1fbdf84

jaydamani mentioned this pull request Mar 19, 2025

[$350] Bank - Transaction validation error not shown in Spanish & new WS created shown with red dot #57423

Closed

8 tasks

make max attempt error non dismissable

fda176f

Merge branch 'main' into translation/show-too-many-attempts-error-for…

ea2a6f2

…-bank-account-flow--57423

brunovjk approved these changes Mar 31, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from justinpersaud March 31, 2025 13:35

justinpersaud reviewed Mar 31, 2025

View reviewed changes

justinpersaud requested a review from a team March 31, 2025 14:04

add margin for error message

67531a8

justinpersaud approved these changes Apr 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

justinpersaud merged commit 3f3bd80 into Expensify:main Apr 1, 2025
18 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Apr 1, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-04-01 #59448

Closed

60 tasks

Conversation

jaydamani commented Mar 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 19, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Mar 19, 2025

Uh oh!

jaydamani commented Mar 20, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Mar 21, 2025

Uh oh!

dannymcclain commented Mar 21, 2025

Uh oh!

dubielzyk-expensify commented Mar 24, 2025

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented Mar 24, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Mar 24, 2025

Uh oh!

justinpersaud commented Mar 25, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Mar 26, 2025

Uh oh!

justinpersaud commented Mar 26, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Mar 26, 2025

Uh oh!

justinpersaud commented Mar 26, 2025

Uh oh!

jaydamani commented Mar 26, 2025

Uh oh!

justinpersaud commented Mar 26, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Mar 26, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Mar 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jaydamani commented Mar 29, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Mar 31, 2025

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

brunovjk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

justinpersaud Mar 31, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shawnborton Mar 31, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shawnborton Mar 31, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

justinpersaud Mar 31, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented Mar 31, 2025

Uh oh!

jaydamani commented Mar 31, 2025

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented Mar 31, 2025

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented Mar 31, 2025

Uh oh!

dubielzyk-expensify commented Apr 1, 2025

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Apr 1, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jaydamani commented Mar 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

brunovjk commented Mar 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading