Add ability to bulk select cards from the same bank in the Card filter

[SzymczakJ]

Explanation of Change

This PR adds Card feeds secion to Card filter on Search page, which is only visible to workspace admin. With this PR admin will be able to bulk select cards from the same feed.
PR also makes workspace admins see all the cards linked to workspace(taken from cards_ Onyx key).
Card feeds secion is built from workspace feeds(cards_ Onyx key) and domain feeds which are separeted from cardList object(cardList Onyx key), because right now New Dot doesn't fully support domain cards and it's the only Onyx object that contains it. Admin cannot see all domain cards yet.

Fixed Issues

$ #53231
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

1. Test on account that has at least three workspaces with linked expensify cards and three workspaces with linked company cards(both of them with admin permissions) and a few domain cards linked(*I think we can only assign domain cards on staging by adhoc builds so this part only applies to staging testing).
2. Enter advanced filters on search page and go to card filter.
3. Try scrolling card filter page, selecting and deselecting individual cards.
4. Try selecting card feeds and make sure connected cards also get selected.
5. Try unselecting one of the card feed's individual cards and make sure card feed is also unselected.
6. Try using input to filter cards.
7. Make sure that after saving cards are visible on advanced filters page and after showing results also in the search page input.

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as tests. Please make sure domain feeds are tested well as I didn't have access to any domain feed.

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 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 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.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

androidweb.mov

iOS: Native

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

ioweb.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mov

[Kicu]

Most of these stuff looks ok, although logic is pretty complex 😅
Left some small comments

[Kicu]

Dropped small comments

[shawnborton]

Let us know if there are new screenshots to review.

[SzymczakJ]

Here is the current state(had to cut video in two because it's too big for GH):

cards1480.mov

cards2480.mov

I would like to suggest one change to your previous screenshot @shawnborton. Instead of putting "bankName* - lastFourPan - Virtual(optional)" in subtitle of card item, we should replace bankName with cardName. This way we show card name to the user which in many times is meaningful. WDYT

[shawnborton]

Instead of putting "bankName* - lastFourPan - Virtual(optional)" in subtitle of card item, we should replace bankName with cardName. This way we show card name to the user which in many times is meaningful. WDYT

Good question. I would be curious for @joekaufmanexpensify 's thoughts here, but I think the main information we want to communicate is:

• who the card is assigned to
• what the card program is (maybe less important when only one card program is added)
• what the card's nickname is
• what the last 4 are
• if it's virtual or physical

Does that sound right? Or do we not need to include all of that information? Let's first figure out the requirements and then we can figure out the best way to display it.

cc @Expensify/design too for viz

[dannymcclain]

Let's first figure out the requirements and then we can figure out the best way to display it.

I don't have much to add here but I definitely agree with this approach.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

IMO the non-negotiables are card assignee and last 4. As those are what you definitively need to identify it. Everything else feels like a nice to have, but if we can fit it all, that sounds great.

If we needed to cut something, I'd vote for type of card program (because that is also clear with the card icon), or card nickname. Between those two, I'd lean towards cutting type of card program, also because it is already represented with the card icon.

Card nickname only really becomes useful when one employee has multiple cards, which I am not convinced will be the mainline case. But in that case it will be really helpful.

[shawnborton]

Got it, so maybe something like this then?

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Looks good to me. I assume we'd just omit the card type at the end for third party cards?

[shawnborton]

That makes sense to me, yup!

[SzymczakJ]

I've changed UI to match the new design:

Screen.Recording.2025-01-09.at.17.51.39.mov

@rayane-djouah I think we've finished this design discussion, so the PR is ready for your another review. I'll fix eslint tomorrow as I've ran out of time today.

[shawnborton]

Nice!

These rows feel a bit odd because it's almost like we're repeating the same data twice - we have the last four, and then the masked PAN right afterwards. Is that intentional?

[joekaufmanexpensify]

That is odd. Third party cards do have a "nickname", it is %First name%'s card by default. Are we pulling in the same value for both Expensify and third party cards?

Third party card names are a bit wonky dating back to their original implementation in OldDot, and we plan to refactor them, which could also be part of the issue.

[SzymczakJ]

This name comes from backend and under the field of cardName and I default to it when there is no cardTitle(probably because the user didn't set it). That's also the way we did it on the older version of CardFilter.
Unfortunately on cards that don't have their title set there's no better name to give them. In my opinion giving them the %First name%'s card is also redundant because we have the card owner name on top.
Object with missing title for reference:

[shawnborton]

So maybe we don't use it then, and only add cardTitle if we detect that a custom one was created? Does that make sense? Curious what you think @joekaufmanexpensify

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Yep, that's fine with me. Card name for custom feeds will get cleaned up here, so yeah just not showing them for now works.

[SzymczakJ]

Final version:

Bumping @rayane-djouah 🙏

[shawnborton]

Looks good to me!