search

liuy1103 / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Weird bullet point formatting for certain parts of the DG #10

Open liuy1103 opened 2 months ago

liuy1103 commented 2 months ago

Unusual big font and bolding for certain bullet points at the end of the DG.

Appendix: Commands Glossary (the exit bullet point has unusually large font size and bolding)

image.png

Appendix: Instructions for manual testing, finding a recipe by meal category image.png

soc-se-bot commented 2 months ago

Team's Response

No details provided by team.

The 'Original' Bug

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

Inconsistent formatting in DG

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.

Random heading for exit command, which may be caused by a typo?

image.png

[original: nus-cs2113-AY2324S2/pe-interim#2254] [original labels: type.DocumentationBug severity.VeryLow]

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

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

Sure, we think it's a typo, thanks.

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: I believe there is a misunderstanding that I would like to clarify. The report categorised as the original bug with a VeryLow severity level does indeed show an instance of formatting inconsistency similar to mine, but my submission highlights two distinct instances of such errors, along with an additional typographical error ("SInforms" instead of "Informs"), that was not present in the other report, suggesting a broader issue with the documentation consistency and additional layer of proofreading oversight of the developer team.

While there may be an overlap in the type of issue reported, the fact that my report includes multiple instances and a typo clearly differentiates it from the one marked as the original. Therefore, I believe it should be treated as a separate, more severe concern. It is essential to recognise the cumulative impact of these documentation issues and its impact on perceived professionalism of the content.

## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.VeryLow`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:** Firstly, I am thankful for the developer team's response on the bug report. However, I am not very convinced with the team's choice of the severity level assigned to this specific documentation bug, which has been revised from my initial perception of `Medium` to `VeryLow`. To begin, the deviation from the expected proper formatting style (normal font size and not bolded bullet points) occurs not once, but multiple times (twice in different parts of the DG), which disrupts the reading flow and detracts from the professionalism of the documentation. I believe that accurate and well-presented documentation is crucial for user comprehension and trust, and recurring formatting issues certainly convey an impression of inattention to detail. Moreover, actually there is also a typographical error in the same screenshot provided in the bug report, where it is "SInforms" instead of "Informs", making it even less convincing to classify the bug as `VeryLow` because there are at least 2 documentation issues that is found in a single screenshot, and given the unusually big font size and bolding, it is even more noticeable to someone using the documentation, lowering the documentation quality. In conclusion, while a single formatting issue might be overlooked, the fact that this has happened in more than a single section (for the font size and bolding in bullet points, putting aside the typo), amplifies the fact that this issue cannot be viewed as `VeryLow`. I respectfully suggest that a `Low` severity level would be more appropriate than `VeryLow` due to the visibility and repeated nature of the bug reported, which are significant enough to merit a higher severity level. The below screenshot highlights the typo within the same bug report screenshot submitted: ![image.png](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/liuy1103/pe/main/files/3f6e0a56-54ab-48c5-8e77-0873487aeab5.png)