nus-pe-bot
commented
9 months ago Team's Response
Target user profile is clearly defined in the DG.
Hence, the behaviour highlighted of restricting student ID is in-line with our target user profile, and should not be considered a Feature Flaw.
We understand that, in the UG, the introduction was vague on the type of TAs. However, this is already a reported Documentation Bug, which we accepted. We believe that the tester had access to the DG, and could refer to the scoped target user profile documented there, which would have corrected the misconception that target user = TAs in general.
Hence, we are rejecting this bug report, since the feature is in fact in-line with our target user profile of NUS TAs teaching CS courses.
Note: We have also clarified with Prof in the forum, over the validity of this bug reported (link). Since there is clear evidence in our DG that our target user profile refers to NUS TAs teaching CS courses, we have evaluated this bug report based on it.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: Thank you for your response!
However, I believe that the clarity of the target user was not clear enough to a potential user of TAvigator.
This is because the actual scope of the target user profile (NUS TAs teaching CS courses) is only mentioned once in the Developer Guide (as shown in the team's screenshot), and not mentioned in the User Guide at all.
It is unrealistic to expect a potential user (i.e. TA from a random university) to read the whole Developer Guide (1. They are most likely not a developer; 2. The target user profile is near the bottom of the DG) and realise that they cannot use the application at all, because the application was not built for them.
Hence, I believe that it is not clear to a potential user that the product is built solely for TAs in NUS teaching CS courses.
Nevertheless, I do agree with your explanation that it could be reported as a DocumentationBug instead.
An improvement in the documentation (i.e. stating the target user profile clearly at the start of the User Guide) would have prevented this misconception.
Thank you.
- Type: FeatureFlaw -> DocumentationBug
app: Student ID field is too restrictive
Affected Component(s)
[x] Application [ ] User Guide [ ] Developer Guide
Description
The app restricts student_id to be in the format
A[0-9]{7}[A-Za-z]{1}.However, not all universities worldwide has student ids that follow this format.
For example, in OAS sheets in NUS exams, I noticed that there are usually multiple prefixes other than A.
Hence, limiting prefix of student ids to A + 7 numbers + letter is too restrictive given the app's target audience ("targeted towards Teaching Assistants") , which is not only limited to NUS
Steps to reproduce
Command(s) entered:
Expected behavior
Able to add a student, perhaps with a warning
Actual behavior
Cannot add
Screenshots, if any
Additional context / Potentially problematic behavior / Improvements
[x] I have checked that this has not been addressed in the Planned Enhancements of the Developer Guide.
Reason for choosing severity level: