Skip to end of banner
Go to start of banner

ui-reading-room Module submission self-evaluation

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 4 Next »

Step 1 - select one of the 3 results below against each criteria:

  • ACCEPTABLE

  • UNACCEPTABLE

  • INAPPLICABLE

Step 2 - provide evidence

#

Criteria

Comments/action items

Responsible

 Evaluation result

ACCEPTABLE
UNACCEPTABLE
INAPPLICABLE

Evidence

1

Uses Apache 2.0 license

ACCEPTABLE

ui-reading-room/LICENSE at master · folio-org/ui-reading-room (github.com)

2

Module build MUST produce a valid module descriptor

ACCEPTABLE

3

Module descriptor MUST include interface requirements for all consumed APIs

ACCEPTABLE

https://github.com/folio-org/ui-reading-room/blob/8528700ef0c33fac698e12ff99bedc76a1c66753/package.json#L24

4

Third party dependencies use an Apache 2.0 compatible license

ACCEPTABLE

5

In order to ensure reproducible builds, snapshot versions of build-time dependencies should not be referenced.

INAPPLICABLE

6

Installation documentation is included

Nothing specific for UI module

ACCEPTABLE

ui-reading-room/README.md at master · folio-org/ui-reading-room (github.com)

7

Personal data form is completed, accurate, and provided as PERSONAL_DATA_DISCLOSURE.md file

Create a PR for this

8

Sensitive and environment-specific information is not checked into git repository

ACCEPTABLE

9

Module is written in a language and framework from the officially approved technologies page

ACCEPTABLE

10

Module only uses FOLIO interfaces already provided by previously accepted modules e.g. a UI module cannot be accepted that relies on an interface only provided by a back end module that hasn't been accepted yet

This UI module comes together with mod-reading-room that is new module as well, can't mark this is completed, but as soon as mod-consortia is accepted this point can be marked as done

11

Module gracefully handles the absence of third party systems or related configuration

INAPPLICABLE

12

Sonarqube hasn't identified any security issues, major code smells or excessive (>3%) duplication

ACCEPTABLE

Summary - ui-reading-room in folio-org SonarCloud

13

Uses officially supported build tools

ACCEPTABLE

14

Unit tests have 80% coverage or greater, and are based on officially approved technologies

ACCEPTABLE

Summary - ui-reading-room in folio-org SonarCloud

15

If provided, End-to-end tests must be written in an officially approved technology

while it's strongly recommended that modules implement integration tests, it's not a requirement

INAPPLICABLE

16

Have i18n support via react-intl and an en.json file with English texts

ACCEPTABLE

ui-reading-room/translations/ui-reading-room/en.json at master · folio-org/ui-reading-room (github.com)

17

Have WCAG 2.1 AA compliance as measured by a current major version of axe DevTools Chrome Extension

master latest has been pulled and accessibility verified from localhost.

1. Lighthouse score is 100.

  1. axe devTools have reported 0 issues

  2. axe tests in unit tests have passed

ACCEPTABLE

18

Use the latest release of Stripes at the time of evaluation

ACCEPTABLE

19

Follow relevant existing UI layouts, patterns and norms

ACCEPTABLE

20

Must work in the latest version of Chrome (the supported runtime environment) at the time of evaluation

ACCEPTABLE

  • No labels