Conduct Visual Reviews of Methods site

[echappen]

A description of the work

Conduct a visual review of new site that ensures visual parity with the original methods site.

Since we have automated tests to check for broken links, manual checking for broken links is not necessary.

Use these builds for comparison:
New site
Old site

Accessibility review will be done separately, but if any a11y issues affect design, note them.

Page assignment

• Discover pages (including All Discover cards page) - @juliaklindpaintner
• Decide pages (including all Decide cards page) - @melchoyce
• Make pages (including all Make cards page) - @melchoyce
• Validate pages (including all Make cards page) - @melchoyce
• Fundamentals pages (including all Fundamentals cards page) - @melchoyce
• About - @juliaklindpaintner
• Print the Methods - @juliaklindpaintner
• Service blueprint example - @melchoyce
• Usability test script - @melchoyce
• Interview Checklist - @melchoyce
• Interview Debrief - @melchoyce
• Interview Script - @melchoyce

Known issues

1. The new site uses USWDS v3, and old site uses v2, so there will be some slight adjustments in font size and spacing. The whole repo uses the same USWDS version, so let's keep to the v3 defaults as much as possible. If there's something egregiously off, then we'll consider a USWDS override.
2. Link icons don't show up for some headers because they're not created from Markdown. This is a known issue described in [Bug]: link icons do not render for data-based content #274
3. There are some redundant pages with the UX guide, described in Methods and UX guide both have an interview checklist, debrief, etc #356
4. Markdown checkboxes don't render by default in 11ty, described in Recreate interview checklist for methods #294

How to submit an issue

If you want to submit an issue, first check if there's an existing issue for it. If there's an existing issue, make sure it has the "methods design review" label.

If there's no issue, create a new issue using this issue template which should give it the label "methods design review" automatically.

Part of of Epic #224

Point of contact on this issue

Eleni Chappen

Reproduction steps (if necessary)

No response

Skills Needed

• Any Human
• Design
• Content
• Engineering
• Acquisition
• Product
• Other

Does this need to happen in the next 2 weeks?

• Yes
• No

How much time do you anticipate this work taking?

1-2 days

Acceptance Criteria

• Ensure all items are prioritized for migration (fix before migration / fix after / won't fix)

[echappen]

Done: all issues are accounted for, labeled "methods design review"