Excessive Terms in Glossary

[chiaryan]

I would think that the Glossary has too many terms that the user does not require to know the operate the app. Public knowledge like what Windows, MacOS and JSON are terms would be considered public information that is not specific to the application. I don't all these terms should be included because it would decrease the usability of the glossary.

[nus-se-script]

Team's Response

Thanks for the suggestion! However, we feel that for glossary, adding more details would only benefit more users who may be unclear with certain terms used (even though they could be "common sense" for many).

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• [x] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: Hey, thanks for responding. I don't disagree that there are some users who won't know what the "common sense" terms are, however I would like to argue that there is harm in defining too many excessive terms in the glossary, which is that it can create unnecessary mental overhead for the user when using the glossary, which would detract from the user experience.

I would say that this cost of including too many terms (additional mental overhead to anyone who reads the glossary) is not worth the benefit of including them. (the inconvenience of Googling publicly known terms for a small subset of users who don't know what the terms are)

However, if the team is really interested in making sure that the user can find explanations for all terms in the UG, then I'd also like to point out that the Glossary doesn't mention what Telegram is, which is even less common knowledge than some of the terms that were chosen to be included

---