Finalize design recommendations for Service Location Address paragraph type

[davidmpickett]

User Story or Problem Statement

The Address section of Service Locations has been reviewed in #14845 and #17342, but it still needs work before it's ready for engineers to implement.

Latest design

Description or Additional Context

Latest iteration:

Steps for Implementation

Acceptance Criteria

• Improve help text
• Consider possible combinations of required fields
• Document recommendations in Figma
• Update implementation ticket with specific updates

[davidmpickett]

Found an older ticket that covers some of the this territory with some good insights from users: #8830

[thejordanwood]

I show this on the Locations headers page in the VAMC Master Figma file.

Status update:

• It was decided in UX sync that the Name field is required, but the Building name / room number fields will not be required. That's shown in the mockups.
• I've suggested different help text for the Name field for @davidmpickett and @laflannery to review. There is an open comment thread in Figma discussing this.

[jilladams]

From discussion with Dave / Amanda:

• We are proposing a pattern for CMS design system, to add input placeholder text
• Implementation ticket will wait til we have discussed that with Marisa for CMS Team reference.

We'll keep this ticket open to track those steps.

[davidmpickett]

From discussion with Dave / Amanda:

• We are proposing a pattern for CMS design system, to add input placeholder text
• Implementation ticket will wait til we have discussed that with Marisa for CMS Team reference.

We'll keep this ticket open to track those steps.

So turns out that placeholder text is an accessibility no-no. So we won't be pursuing that. But I think the new UX is a lot clearer than the current implementation

@aklausmeier this is ready for your approval. After you have signed off I will update the implementation ticket.

[thejordanwood]

@aklausmeier had a small update to this that I've made on the mockups.

@davidmpickett I've updated the implementation ticket to show specific changes, but please feel free to review.

[davidmpickett]

Thanks @thejordanwood! I just went through and updated the implementation ticket to be a little more Drupal developer friendly. I also took out the bullet point about making field_clinic_name required. That will have broader content model implications and should be a separate piece of work. All of the other changes are still improvements and can be implemented ASAP