Open bryanyee33 opened 4 months ago
We can consider it in future iterations.
Team chose [response.NotInScope
]
Reason for disagreement: This is the exact same scenario as Example 1 given for overzealous input validation with phone numbers.
Moreover, the devs placed this issue under response.NotInScope
, with the reasoning of "We can consider it in future iterations.", even though there is no mention of fixing this issue in the UG or DG in the future. Also, there was no explanation on whether rectifying this is less important. Hence, their reasoning is invalid and insufficient, and there is no justification provided for putting it under response.NotInScope
.
Phone numbers only allow 1 phone number to be included, while users might wish to input multiple phone numbers. Eg. Secondary phone number if first one fails, phone numbers of next of kin, etc.
Such details should be allowed to be included instead of overzealous input validations.