soc-pe-bot
commented
1 year ago Team's Response
Yes we do agree that it will be easier to type. However, using such shorthand will make it harder for the user to learn and remember the commands. Our team feel that the cons outweigh the pros of having a shorthand and hence decided not to go with it.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: We can have both the long version and the shorthand version without reducing functionality at all.
In addition, I believe this could have been implemented without too much additional effort since we should only change the parsing logic of the application status parameter.
As stated in the website, "Feature flaws can be claimed as NotInScope, if they qualify as per rules explained above, except for these cases: if the feature is implemented to work in a certain way but it could have been implemented to work in a better way (from the end-user's point of view) without much additional effort"
As a CLI-first application, it would be more optimized to target the target user's profile if there are shorthand for long strings that are commonly typed, i.e. applied as app, shortlisted as shl, interviewed as ivw, accepted as acc, rejected as rej, and so on.