Fix numbering on Low-income Basic Flow

[thekaveman]

The chart shows 11 steps:

But the list only has 9 steps:

Expected behavior

The chart is (correctly) showing all steps in the process, while the list presents a more plain-language (and still correct) version of the process. Suggest removing the numbering from the chart (other flow charts do not have numbering) to avoid confusion.

[indexing]

@thekaveman I can see how you read the diagram and the basic flow together, but my intent was for each to have a distinct purpose.

• The diagram shows each technical step in benefit enrollment and the sequence of system actions, as well as the relationship, between services and platforms.
• The basic flow, on the other hand, lists the steps a user (transit rider) takes to complete enrollment. It describes both what the user does and how the system responds to those inputs.

Including the step to choose a transit agency, for example, is too granular for the diagram as that's a UI interaction. Step 5 in the flow is brief and covers several backend calls and responses in the diagram.

Thus, I see them as complementary and don't believe they have to align verbatim.

If we want to make it more clear that they are distinct, I propose adding a header to the diagram that reads something like Technical Architecture and moving the the Basic Flow header above the sequence.

[thekaveman]

@indexing I follow you. I think I was tripped up mostly on the numbering on the flow chart, especially since the other flow charts do not have numbering. Should we be consistent here (one way or the other)?

[indexing]

@thekaveman For me, the numbering in the chart is a helpful affordance to understand the process as a sequence and the numbering makes it a bit easier to step through the phases when scanning. I do note the numbering is new in this diagram; I propose adding it to the others (which I will do). Any objections? Maybe add this as a task in #1812 ?

[thekaveman]

Closing as this is being tracked in #1812.