search

ling-ui / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Multiplicity error in UML diagram #12

Open ling-ui opened 1 year ago

ling-ui commented 1 year ago

image.png

image.png

As stated in the UG, fields such as email, phone and address are optional. Hence multiplicity should be shown as 0..1 instead of 1.

soc-se-bot commented 1 year ago

[IMPORTANT!: Please do not edit or reply to this comment using the GitHub UI. You can respond to it using CATcher during the next phase of the PE]

Team's Response

Issue is also regarding the multiplicity in the same diagram.

The 'Original' Bug

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

[DG] Model Class diagram multiplicity

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.

From your UG, it states that the following are optional:

  • PHONE
  • EMAIL
  • ADDRESS
  • LEAVE
  • TAG

As such, there should be a multiplicity of 0..1.

But your model class diagram insinuates that it is compulsory for these fields to hold a value, when they could be null.

image.png

Therefore, the multiplicity for some of them should be update to 0..1.

[original: nus-cs2103-AY2223S1/pe-interim#2184] [original labels: type.DocumentationBug severity.Low]

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

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

Hi there! Thanks so much for the report.

If you look at our implementation of the Person class, when email, address and phone is not added, they are still initialised and composed as static objects with placeholder value of N/A. Hence, the multiplicity of this will still be 1. Hence we are rejecting this bug.

Once again, thank you so much for informing us regarding the error.

Cheers,
Coydir
HR is hard, Coydir is easy
(est. 2022)

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 reason]

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your reason]

:question: Issue severity

Team chose [severity.Low] Originally [severity.High]

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your reason]