Update create expense confirmation page to more clearly indicate automation

[parasharrajat]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #71601
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. Go to ND
2. Create scan expense
3. Verify that the UI matches OP [$500] Update create expense confirmation page to more clearly indicate automation #71601
4. Verify that we can create expenses.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover 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 tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• I followed proper code patterns (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
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • 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 followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• 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
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• 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 new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• 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.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot]

Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

1. Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
2. Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running:

npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...rc/components/Icon/chunks/expensify-icons.chunk.ts	0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/components/ImageWithSizeCalculation.tsx	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.tsx	59.05% <100.00%> (+0.58%)	⬆️
src/components/ReceiptImage/index.tsx	71.87% <ø> (ø)
...ListWithSections/BaseSelectionListWithSections.tsx	76.10% <ø> (ø)
src/components/ThumbnailImage.tsx	87.09% <ø> (ø)
src/hooks/useStyleUtils.ts	50.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts	71.69% <100.00%> (+0.24%)	⬆️
...es/utils/getReceiptContainerStyles/index.native.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/styles/utils/index.ts	47.53% <ø> (ø)
... and 4 more
... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@allroundexperts 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]

[parasharrajat]

I was checking the designs, and I think we can't use the full flex area because the image height is less. I think it would be best to follow the same sizing for the receipt as we do in the Wide expense view.

For example following does not look good.

Do we agree?

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Nice, excited for this change!

[dubielzyk-expensify]

I think we can set a max-height on the receipt, but we'll generally want it to fill on mobile screens. Then let's run a test build when you're ready

[parasharrajat]

So wouldn't it be better to keep the image height when the image is smaller. I will make that change then show you.

[puneetlath]

@parasharrajat let me know when you want me to create the ad-hoc.

[puneetlath]

@parasharrajat how's this going? What do we need to do to get it to the finish line?

[allroundexperts]

@parasharrajat What's the status here?

[parasharrajat]

I am trying to set the auto aspect ratio on the receipt image. I will let you know in sometime how did it go?

[parasharrajat]

I attempted to change the aspect ratio of images, but it is still not looking correct IMO. The original design is not correct as it stretches the image. This is how it will look for smaller images. But after testing a couple of images, I can see that most of them are wide images and in a 16:9 ratio. It means the height of these images will never expand vertically to take up the full space, even on mobile. It is because the width is small than the height of the mobile devices. So I want to get suggestions before I get more into it.

@dubielzyk-expensify What do you think?

I will continue looking in the meantime.

[dubielzyk-expensify]

What we want is to have that the image stretches the full height like the mocks on mobile, but that theres a max-height so on desktop it'll stop:

But after testing a couple of images, I can see that most of them are wide images and in a 16:9 ratio.

Curious where you've found this insight. From my experience most people upload vertical receipts as PDFs, invoices, and receipts printed at stores are in portrait format.

[parasharrajat]

Yes, the phone will have different ratios, so while taking photos with the phone, it will be fine.

Now my question remains the same. Are we fine with showing the image in original aspect ratio, or do we need to stretch it vertically up to max height even though the image will be clipped from sides?

[dubielzyk-expensify]

Now my question remains the same. Are we fine with showing the image in original aspect ratio, or do we need to stretch it vertically up to max height even though the image will be clipped from sides?

Curious for @dannymcclain ''s take here as well. Initially I was thinking stretching, but if it's landscape it will look very zoomed in. Maybe it's worth going with the original aspect ratio. What do you think Danny?

[dannymcclain]

@dubielzyk-expensify I'm torn—obviously we don't want to stretch the image so much that the quality looks really bad, but the effect doesn't really land as well when the image doesn't take up the whole area. Would it be insane to do something like this (which I've seen as a solution to this problem in other apps):

Basically what I'm doing is stretching the image in the BG and adding a blur/transparency and then setting the actual on top confined to its aspect ratio. Could be a terrible idea!

[parasharrajat]

I can experiment with this idea.

[dubielzyk-expensify]

Ohh I like that, Danny.

Thanks for trying it out and helping us get to the best solution, @parasharrajat !

[parasharrajat]

I do not have the dimensions of the receipt. @dannymcclain can you please share that? What is the max height you were referring to?

[dannymcclain]

I actually think if we go this route we won't need a max-height? Because we can always have the blurred image in the background to fill up whatever "extra" space there is. @dubielzyk-expensify what do you think?

[dubielzyk-expensify]

Agree. Let's try Danny's suggestion which means we'll fill the height regardless

[Pujan92]

@parasharrajat needs to fix conflicts and merge main to fix checks

[parasharrajat]

I am currently not available for this so I have asked for help on slack and @ShridharGoel will take over.

[ShridharGoel]

@puneetlath Do you think a temp branch can be created here in Expensify/App where we can merge this PR, and then I can open a PR which will have it's base as that temp branch? It will be easier to manage the git author history of the changes.

[ShridharGoel]

Though ideally we should have merged #72002 in a temporary branch and then continued this, since it seems the commits are from there

[parasharrajat]

@ShridharGoel its fine. you can override.

[puneetlath]

Being continued here: #78859