search

Nafeij / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Several DG diagrams are too complicated #7

Open Nafeij opened 1 year ago

Nafeij commented 1 year ago

image.png

Several UML diagrams in the DG, namely those under 3.2. UI component, 3.4. Model component have too many classes or overlapping dependency-arrows. Perhaps consider restricting it to display only newly-added classes.

image.png

sequence diagrams under 4.2. Employee-related features, 4.3. Department-related features and 4.4. Leave-related features are too wide, such that the displayed text size is too small to be legible.S

nus-pe-script commented 1 year ago

Team's Response

Whether the DG diagrams are too complicated is debatable. Regarding the diagram you showed for the Model, we have actually already omitted several sub-components for our classes to make it more understandable for our reader. We have reviewed our diagrams and do not believe that there is anything too complicated, especially for a developer.

For the sequence diagram, as addressed in #4387, we are unable to cater to every screen size for the reader. For example, if a reader is using a phone to view the diagram, it will undoubtedly be "too small" and thus he has to zoom in. It is possible to zoom in on a PDF, so this should not be an issue.

The 'Original' Bug

[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]

Sequence Diagram too small to view for edep command

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.

The sequence diagram is too small to be properly visible by me, unless i zoom onto the diagram. Perhaps, split the diagram into 2: 1 for parsing command, 1 for executing command.

toosmall.PNG

[original: nus-cs2103-AY2223S2/pe-interim#4212] [original labels: severity.Low type.DocumentationBug]

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]

Ok. We will fix this.

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)

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]