nus-pe-script
commented
6 months ago Team's Response
No details provided by team.
The 'Original' Bug
[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]
NFR and glossary lacking details
Note from the teaching team: This bug was reported during the Part II (Evaluating Documents) stage of the PE. You may reject this bug if it is not related to the quality of documentation.
Describe the bug More details specific to your product can be added. It seems like this was brought over from AB3/lacking specific contextual details.Screenshot
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S2/pe-interim#1515] [original labels: severity.Medium type.DocumentationBug]
Their Response to the 'Original' Bug
[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]
Current NFRs and Glossary is deemed sufficient by our team for this current version.
We will be adding more details in future versions.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue duplicate status
Team chose to mark this issue as a duplicate of another issue (as explained in the Team's response above)
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]
## :question: Issue response Team chose [`response.NotInScope`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** Reasons similar to Issue #11
## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.VeryLow`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** Reasons similar to Issue #11
Describe the bug This issue actually arose from trying to understand the inputs allowed for each parameter, specifically for the addPolicy command, where there are quite a fair bit of insurance related jargons.
Specifically, I was confused whether the uniqueness of the policy number is extended within the same person, or within the entire address book. I thought that policy numbers are unique to each policy and person.
Expected behavior You could approach this in various ways.
When explaining the terms, you could give limitations to each term, such as unique policy numbers per person.
Screenshot