[$250] QAB - Quick action shows the old title "Track distance" for distance expense in self DM

[lanitochka17]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.0.87-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: N/A
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: N/A
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Action Result:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Go to self DM
3. Click + > Create expense > Manual
4. Create a manual expense in self DM
5. Open FAB
6. Note that Quick action shows "Create expense"
7. Create a scan expense in self DM
8. Open FAB
9. Note that Quick action shows "Create expense for receipt"
10. Create a distance expense in self DM
11. Open FAB

Expected Result:

Since "track expense" is renamed to "create expense", "Track distance" in Quick action should be renamed to "Create expense for distance", which is coherent with Quick action for "Create expense" (Step 6) and "Create expense for receipt" (Step 9)

Actual Result:

Quick action still shows the old title "Track distance" for distance expense in self DM

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6717987_1737263039838.20250119_125142.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021881123172239037305
• Upwork Job ID: 1881123172239037305
• Last Price Increase: 2025-02-04
• Automatic offers:
• etCoderDysto | Contributor | 105938059

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @mananjadhav

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @jliexpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[etCoderDysto]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-01-19 14:36:34 UTC.

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-01-19 14:36:34 UTC.

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

QAB - Quick action shows the old title "Track distance" for distance expense in self DM

Bug 1

• Update recordDistance copy to "Track distance"
• A quick refactor to clean up this code, as maintaining distinct trackManual, trackScan, trackDistance options here seem unnecessary now with the consolidation to one "Create expense" flow.

Bug 2

• Update the per diem QAB copy to "Create per diem". Note: currently we are not displaying perdiem qab action after a perdiem expense is created.

What is the root cause of that problem?

Bug1

• We are getting fab title here using titleKey
  

  App/src/pages/home/sidebar/SidebarScreen/FloatingActionButtonAndPopover.tsx

  Lines 249 to 250 in 86b9c79

  	const titleKey = getQuickActionTitle(quickAction?.action ?? ('' as QuickActionName));
  	return titleKey ? translate(titleKey) : '';

• getQuickActionTitle returns translation keys that is based on the quick action type. Example: if the quick action type is manual request quickAction.requestMoney will be returned
  

  App/src/pages/home/sidebar/SidebarScreen/FloatingActionButtonAndPopover.tsx

  Lines 137 to 140 in 1f99949

  	const getQuickActionTitle = (action: QuickActionName): TranslationPaths => {
  	switch (action) {
  	case CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.REQUEST_MANUAL:
  	return 'quickAction.requestMoney';

• then key will be used to get the translation copies. Currently, we are using separate keys for track expense actions and request actions. CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.REQUEST_MANUAL and CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.TRACK_MANUAL will return different translation keys
  

  App/src/languages/en.ts

  Lines 838 to 844 in 86b9c79

  	quickAction: {
  	scanReceipt: 'Scan receipt',
  	recordDistance: 'Record distance',
  	requestMoney: 'Create expense',
  	splitBill: 'Split expense',
  	splitScan: 'Split receipt',
  	splitDistance: 'Split distance',

Bug 2 (per diem)
When creating perdiem request, we are not updating quick action with the new perdiem request as shown below. For manual and scan request, we update quick action here, but we are not handling the case for perdiem request. BE also doesn't create quick action for perdiem requsts.

The call stack for perdiem: submitPerDiemExpense -> getPerDiemExpenseInformation -> buildOnyxDataForMoneyRequest




App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 1340 to 1348 in b59f23b

	if (!isOneOnOneSplit && !isPerDiemRequest) {
	optimisticData.push({
	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
	key: ONYXKEYS.NVP_QUICK_ACTION_GLOBAL_CREATE,
	value: {
	action: newQuickAction,
	chatReportID: chat.report?.reportID,
	isFirstQuickAction: isEmptyObject(quickAction),
	},

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

Bug 1

• Change the getQuickActionTitle switch case to return scanReceipt, recordDistance and requestMoney translation keys for money request and track expense here

case CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.REQUEST_MANUAL || CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.TRACK_MANUAL:
            return 'quickAction.requestMoney';
        case CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.REQUEST_SCAN || CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.TRACK_SCAN:
            return 'quickAction.scanReceipt';
        case CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.REQUEST_DISTANCE ||  CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.TRACK_DISTANCE:
            return 'quickAction.recordDistance';

• Update recordDistance key copy to "Track distance"
• Remove trackManual, trackScan, and trackDistance copies from en.ts and es.ts

App/src/languages/en.ts

Lines 838 to 841 in 86b9c79

	quickAction: {
	scanReceipt: 'Scan receipt',
	recordDistance: 'Record distance',
	requestMoney: 'Create expense',

Bug 2:

1. Add a variable for per diem here

PER_DIEM: 'perDiem'

2. Here we should assign newQuickAction = CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.PER_DIEM when the request type is perdiem

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 990 in b59f23b

let newQuickAction: ValueOf<typeof CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS> = isScanRequest ? CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.REQUEST_SCAN : CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.REQUEST_MANUAL;

3. Then here we should remove && !isPerDiemRequest logic to updated onyx quick action with perdiem request type
   

   App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

   Lines 1340 to 1345 in b59f23b

   	if (!isOneOnOneSplit && !isPerDiemRequest) {
   	optimisticData.push({
   	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
   	key: ONYXKEYS.NVP_QUICK_ACTION_GLOBAL_CREATE,
   	value: {
   	action: newQuickAction,

4. Here return a new translation key for per diem quick action

        case CONST.QUICK_ACTIONS.PER_DIEM:
            return 'quickAction.perDiemRequest';

5. Add a copy in en.ts and es.ts for quickAction.perDiemRequest translation key

6. we should update backend to to mirror the front end

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

We can add test that validates the quick action type is perdiem after creating perdiem expense

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[github-actions]

⚠️ @etCoderDysto Thanks for your proposal. Please update it to follow the proposal template, as proposals are only reviewed if they follow that format (note the mandatory sections).

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021881123172239037305

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @mananjadhav (External)

[melvin-bot]

Upwork job price has been updated to $125

[jliexpensify]

@Expensify/design I think this one makes sense, but I'd like to confirm this is ok for the rename:

"Track distance" in Quick action should be renamed to "Create expense for distance", which is coherent with Quick action for "Create expense" (Step 6) and "Create expense for receipt" (Step 9)

[shawnborton]

Yeah, I think it makes sense to map the QAB actions to the Global create actions. What if we used our dot separator pattern for the QAB labels? Like so:

• If the user does Create expense > Manual, then QAB should say Create expense • Manual
• If the user does Create expense > Scan, then QAB should say Create expense • Scan
• If the user does Create expense > Distance, then QAB should say Create expense • Distance
• If the user does Create expense > Per diem, then the QAB should say Create expense • Per diem

Thoughts @Expensify/design @trjExpensify @JmillsExpensify @jamesdeanexpensify ?

[dubielzyk-expensify]

Note that Quick action shows "Create expense for receipt"

I don't mind that at all and I recon it's probably the right way to go especially from a systems perspective. I will say I really like the human and straight forward string of Scan receipt. Not sure if it can be replicated easily across the board, but if we go the less structured way, I wouldn't mind seeing something like:

• Manual -> Create expense
• Scan -> Scan receipt
• Distance -> Track distance (Add distance!? )
• Per diem -> Per diem request (!?)

[shawnborton]

I see what you are saying but I don't love the variability of the words we're using there... some are expenses, some are requests, some track, some create, etc...

I could get down with something like:

• Create manual expense
• Scan receipt
• Create distance expense
• Create per diem expense

Thoughts?

[dubielzyk-expensify]

Yeah that's a fair point. I guess I just think words such as manual are less friendly etc. I appreciate the riff 🙏

I think the above works well for me, but keen to hear what the others think.

[etCoderDysto]

• Create manual expense
• Scan receipt
• Create distance expense
• Create per diem expense

@shawnborton Does this change apply for quick actions created my track expense and money request or are we making the change for track expense only?

Currently we are displaying the copy below for money request(create expense) types

        scanReceipt: 'Scan receipt',
        recordDistance: 'Record distance',
        requestMoney: 'Create expense',

And this copy for track expense

        trackManual: 'Create expense',
        trackScan: 'Create expense for receipt',
        trackDistance: 'Track distance',

[shawnborton]

Part of me thinks we'd use the same language everywhere, the only difference is that a "tracked" expense ends up in your personal space, which would be denoted by the icon on the right side of the QAB row.

From my personal space, I don't even see the langauge for Track anymore anyways:

Maybe @trjExpensify knows how that works now though? Where and when would you see Track language in the app now?

[etCoderDysto]

Yes, the subtitle (name(you)) also can be serve as an identifier that the action is track expense.

[shawnborton]

Yes, the subtitle (name(you)) also can be serve as an identifier that the action is track expense.

Love that, yup that makes sense.

[trjExpensify]

I think we should keep the Scan receipt label, as we did that specifically for an element of familiarity of migrated users and "fire and forget" to open the camera.

I think probably "Track distance" is the most colloquial term for the action there, we just couldn't use it before because of the whole "Track expense" flow, hence why we rolled with "Record distance". So I would vote for the below personally:

Manual: Create expense
Scan: Scan receipt
Distance: Track distance

[dannymcclain]

I initially really loved Shawn's idea of using the dot separator pattern, but after reading through the thread I think I've come around to what Tom is saying above. Now that we're banishing the idea of "tracking an expense" being tied to your personal space, I think what Tom has laid out makes the most sense/will jive with users the best.

[shawnborton]

Yeah same, I can totally get down with what Tom is suggesting. I think it feels much more natural and succinct than what I was suggesting.

@trjExpensify what are you thinking for per diem though?

[trjExpensify]

@trjExpensify what are you thinking for per diem though?

In the doc it just had Per diem for the QAB label, I'm okay with leaving that one, but could also get behind Create per diem if we want.

[shawnborton]

I like Create per diem so we create some consistency with using a verb at the beginning across all of the items.

[trjExpensify]

Okay cool, based on the above the copy for trackManual and trackDistance are good, but the trackScan one has incorrectly been changed to Create expense for receipt which isn't ideal. I've asked @JKobrynski to update that in his PR here.

As for this issue, I think we can focus on these things:

1. Update recordDistance copy to "Track distance"
2. Update the per diem QAB copy to "Create per diem" (though I can't even see it as a quickAction here?)
3. A quick refactor to clean up this code, as maintaining distinct trackManual, trackScan, trackDistance options here seem unnecessary now with the consolidation to one "Create expense" flow. (Per the above point, if the destination for the quick action is the selfDM, that's highlighted in the second line of the quick action button).

How does that sound to everyone?

[shawnborton]

Works for me 👍

[etCoderDysto]

Sorry for not making it clear. I will clean it up in a minute.

[mananjadhav]

Thanks. Looking forward to it.

[etCoderDysto]

@mananjadhav I have tried to make my proposal clear. I hope it is clear now. It might be confusing since we are trying to handle two bugs. 1. Updating, and consolidating the qab copy for manual, scan, and distance money request as well as track expense, and 2. Creating QAB support for perdiem requests. Currently, when creating perdiem request quick action will not be updated with perdiem quick action and retain the previous quick action type.

Updated proposal

[mananjadhav]

Thanks for the revisions. This looks better. @etCoderDysto's proposal looks good to me.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @arosiclair, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[arosiclair]

A quick refactor to clean up this code, as maintaining distinct trackManual, trackScan, trackDistance options here seem unnecessary now with the consolidation to one "Create expense" flow.

What are we cleaning up exactly? From what I understand there are still 3 different QAB options we display.

[etCoderDysto]

@arosiclair yes, we have 3 different QAB options - manual, scan and distance. But, depending on if the action is money request or track expense action, we are displaying different copies for the three quick action types.

money request actions copy

scanReceipt: 'Scan receipt',
recordDistance: 'Record distance',
requestMoney: 'Create expense',

track expense actions copy

trackManual: 'Create expense',
trackScan: 'Create expense for receipt',
trackDistance: 'Track distance',

The refactor is to remove the copy for track actions from here, and use the money request actions copy for track expense actions too. That means if a user creates track manual expense they will see 'Create expense' as qab title which is reference by requestMoney key.

[trjExpensify]

Yeah, Andrew we used to have Submit expense and Track expense flows. Now we just have the one Create expense flow. So the distinct label names for track (trackManual, trackScan and trackDistance) are redundant now.

If you use Create expense and..

• choose manual (requestMoney), you should have a QAB labelled Create expense.
• choose scan (scanReceipt), you should have a QAB labelled Scan receipt
• choose distance (RecordDistance), you should have a QAB labelled Track distance.*

*Yes, this used to be the QAB label name for distance in the Track flow, but we like it better than "Record distance", which we only chose because the "Track" flow existed.

[arosiclair]

Alright proposal LGTM then 👍

[melvin-bot]

📣 @etCoderDysto 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav @arosiclair @jliexpensify @etCoderDysto this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!

[jliexpensify]

Not overdue, this is being worked on!

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav, @arosiclair, @jliexpensify, @etCoderDysto Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[mananjadhav]

@etCoderDysto What's the ETA on the PR?

[etCoderDysto]

@mananjadhav sorry for the delay. I am working on the PR. PR will be ready for review by tomorrow.

[mananjadhav]

@jliexpensify @trjExpensify I am assuming based on the new context of including the per diem and code refactor can we bump the pay back to the original price of $250?

[melvin-bot]

Upwork job price has been updated to $250

[jliexpensify]

I think that's reasonable.

[etCoderDysto]

@mananjadhav PR is ready for review.

I have some issues to fix while the pr is reviewed, and a BE support for per diem qab is added. I have commented about the issues here. I will fix them while BE support is being added for per diem qab