fix: add offline support for anonymous targeted user via braze notifications

[themooneer]

✅ Checklist

• npx changeset was attached.
• Covered by automatic tests.
• Impact of the changes:
  • ...

📝 Description

Even when the user opt-out from analytics, it can happen that braze campaign target anonymous user via (anonymous_user_id), in this case notification impression/seen process won't be made by calling the tracking/impression request (as it's an opt-out mode). As a reinforcement layer for this scenario, LLD should support the fact that this notification is read via an store/offline indexation process.
Content card's view state will be conditioned by braze metadata and their existence or not in the anonymousUserNotifications store.

Test proof 📹

notif_OK_p1.mov

❓ Context

• JIRA or GitHub link:

https://ledgerhq.atlassian.net/browse/LIVE-15007

---

🧐 Checklist for the PR Reviewers

• The code aligns with the requirements described in the linked JIRA or GitHub issue.
• The PR description clearly documents the changes made and explains any technical trade-offs or design decisions.
• There are no undocumented trade-offs, technical debt, or maintainability issues.
• The PR has been tested thoroughly, and any potential edge cases have been considered and handled.
• Any new dependencies have been justified and documented.
• Performance considerations have been taken into account. (changes have been profiled or benchmarked if necessary)

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

4 Skipped Deployments

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
ledger-live-github-bot	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		Dec 6, 2024 1:43pm
native-ui-storybook	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		Dec 6, 2024 1:43pm
react-ui-storybook	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		Dec 6, 2024 1:43pm
web-tools	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		Dec 6, 2024 1:43pm

[KVNLS]

Why do we need to use a timeout, please?

[themooneer]

so , this timeout is used to wait a little bit before a ui change to mark the content card read (as if it's an api request) , Lucas told me that before the work on this feature it was 3 seconds. It's a time laps to avoid immediate disappear of the dot. Initially i just put 500 ms (like in the video) so it's can disappear in a reasonable time. But i should confirm with Anthony.

[themooneer]

simply it will take 3 seconds so that the seen status will be considered for the offline notifications.

[LucasWerey]

Actually it was 2 seconds my bad here is the code used before :

const { notificationsCards, logNotificationImpression, groupNotifications, onClickNotif } =
    useNotifications();

  const timeoutByUUID = useRef<Record<string, NodeJS.Timeout>>({});
  const handleInViewNotif = useCallback(
    (visible: boolean, uuid: keyof typeof timeoutByUUID.current) => {
      const timeouts = timeoutByUUID.current;

      if (notificationsCards.find(n => !n.viewed && n.id === uuid) && visible && !timeouts[uuid]) {
        timeouts[uuid] = setTimeout(() => {
          logNotificationImpression(uuid);
          delete timeouts[uuid];
        }, 2000);
      }
      if (!visible && timeouts[uuid]) {
        clearTimeout(timeouts[uuid]);
        delete timeouts[uuid];
      }
    },
    [logNotificationImpression, notificationsCards],
  );

[themooneer]

ok i'll change it ! so that we keep the same look & feel of a real api call , rather than suddenly/fast delete them

[themooneer]

✅ Done

[LucasWerey]

I've tested it but now it seems like with analytics on the notif remains active even if the card has the field viewed sets to true

Screen.Recording.2024-12-06.at.10.30.58.mov

[LucasWerey]

LGTM