nus-pe-bot
commented
2 months ago Team's Response
As specified in the UG, all of our commands are space-sensitive (point 4 below).
If you were to follow the instructions in the edit command exactly (as per our UG) , you should not be facing any difficulty in running this command. The spacing is reiterated in all of our command formats and example, as seen below.
However, we understand that this space-sensitivity can cause inconvenience. Thus, we have also specified fixing this space-sensitivity issue in out planned enhancements.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: The team's reasons for rejection are unreasonable for the following reasons.
The commands are neither space-sensitive nor space-insensitive
The team claimed that their commands are space-sensitive which is not the case.
I believe the fourth point in the given image is how the team defines "space-sensitive"
My current issue is that
/edit-person ;name:haha ; field:{ address : Pooch Street 31} works but
/edit-person ;name:haha ; field:{ address :Pooch Street 31} does not work
Notice that the problem is the missing trailing space between the colon and "Pooch Street 31". You will also notice that ;name:haha violates the space-sensitive format in the UG, but the command still works for the first case. This is what I mean by "inconsistent" in terms of space-sensitivity.
If space-sensitive, the command should not work other than having the format as stated in UG (User Guide)
If space-insensitive, the command should work with or without the spaces surrounding the colons and semicolons.
The spaces between colons are optional for anything else except inside the
field. I am so lost when testing the program.