Light-client: Identify inconsistencies between design and implementation

[christianbrb]

Description

Compare design and already implemented screens and define changes that must be made; if possible, implement them as well.

Acceptance criteria

• Both design and implementation must be syncrhonised.
• When design and implementation look different, it must be decided whether we want to fine-tune them (bring them to 100%-100%) or whether we leave them as they are.

Tasks

• [x] @nephix and @roy-castrillo hold meeting to compare design vs implementation
• [x] @nephix and @roy-castrillo make list of inconsistencies and prioritize them in order of importance and feasibility to implement during next iteration.

[christianbrb]

@roy-castrillo Do you still work on this issue or can we close it?

[roy-castrillo]

@christianbrb it's still something I'd like to do before leaving. Maybe I could arrange a meeting with @nephix?

[nephix]

@roy-castrillo sure, how about next Thursday?

[nephix]

Meeting notes:

• Connected tokens:
  
  
  
  • Wrong letter spacing on buttons in dropdown
  
  
• Replace start screen with transfer screen (#519)
• Find meaningful app header labels (e.g. currently Raiden dApp or Send on transfer screen)
• Token overlay
  
  
  
  • Wrong icon spacing
  
  
• Transfer screen
  
  
  
  • Missing > arrow in call to action button
  
  
• Transfer stepper
  
  
  
  • Missing > arrow in call to action button
  
  
  • PFS selection
  
  
  • Maybe not pre-select a route?
  
  
  • Show amount to be transfered in continue button, after PFS got selected
  
  
  • Remove separating header line from PFS selection table
  
  
  • Add more spacing between rows in PFS table
  
  
  • Maybe use same > arrow from action button for table sorting, but rotate up and down
  
  
  • Select Route
  
  
  • Remove separating header line from PFS selection table
  
  
  • Add more spacing between rows in PFS table
  
  
  • Maybe use same > arrow from action button for table sorting, but rotate up and down
  
  
  • Confirmation screen
  
  
  • Proposal TBD by @roy-castrillo & @taleldayekh
  
  
• Route payment overlay (implemented as part of #463)

CC @christianbrb

[christianbrb]

@nephix Thanks :)

Could you split the comment into separate issues? Maybe summarizing the very small changes into one issue.

[nephix]

@christianbrb I have created the following tickets:

542

543

544

I'm closing this ticket, because we've identified the inconsistencies