nus-se-bot
commented
3 years ago Team's Response
Firstly, this location uses addresses which is a property inherited from Addressbook.
Secondly, this is within expected behaviour. Both locations are accepted because the address inputs given are different. This thus does not register as a functionality bug.
Currently, indeed VirusTracker does not make similarity checks to other addresses within the VirusTracker. However, this is not part of functionalities described inside our user guide.
As a feature flaw, the severity would be low because (1) it is very unlikely that the user would create the same location again twice within VirusTracker. What is more likely to happen is that the user mistypes a location, and we have one mistyped location within VirusTracker. This does not affect operations of VirusTracker. (2) locations come attach with an Id, which would flag the location as a repeat if the user creates the location again with an additional space.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your reason]
:question: Issue type
Team chose [type.FeatureFlaw]
Originally [type.FunctionalityBug]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your reason]
:question: Issue severity
Team chose [severity.Low]
Originally [severity.High]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your reason]
The addresses in Locations 11 and 12 are identical, bar the additional space in location 12, as shown below:
This could be an accidental space from the user. The system should either not validate the input in the first place with double spaces, or it should still check the words against others in the database to validate identical addresses.
Such a flaw has a high severity as it can cause confusion since both locations can have very different ID and names but point to essentially the same place.