va-language-toggle: Add label text to event, remove va-link analytics

[ataker]

Chromatic

https://va-language-toggle-analytics-updates--65a6e2ed2314f7b8f98609d8.chromatic.com

Description

Closes Add va-language-toggle to ds-v3-playground for Analytics testing #3532

Making updates based on analytics team in slack

Added the link text to the event.
Disabled analytics on the va-link in va-language-toggle to prevent firing two events at once.

QA Checklist

• Component maintains 1:1 parity with design mocks
• Text is consistent with what's been provided in the mocks
• Component behaves as expected across breakpoints
• Accessibility expert has signed off on code changes (if applicable. If not applicable provide reason why)
• Designer has signed off on changes (if applicable. If not applicable provide reason why)
• Tab order and focus state work as expected
• Changes have been tested against screen readers (if applicable. If not applicable provide reason why)
• New components are covered by e2e tests; updates to existing components are covered by existing test suite
• Changes have been tested in vets-website using Verdaccio (if applicable. If not applicable provide reason why)

Screenshots

Acceptance criteria

• QA checklist has been completed
• Screenshots have been attached that cover desktop and mobile screens

Definition of done

• Documentation has been updated, if applicable
• A link has been provided to the originating GitHub issue (or connected to it via ZenHub)

[jamigibbs]

👍🏼

Do you think we could have caught the duplicate analytics firing if we used .toHaveReceivedEventTimes(1); instead of .toHaveReceivedEvent() in the test here? I have been guilty of doing one or the other not for any particular reason but maybe we need to start testing analytics events using toHaveReceivedEventTimes regularly. 🤔

component-library/packages/web-components/src/components/va-language-toggle/test/va-language-toggle.e2e.ts

Line 58 in 34ce395

expect(toggleSpy).toHaveReceivedEvent();

[ataker]

Yeah, .toHaveReceivedEventTimes(1); would have failed. I updated this test, but that's good to note going forward.