nus-pe-script
commented
2 months ago Team's Response
it does not affect user reading it
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: I disagree.
As a reader, inconsistencies such as the one mentioned above could hinder the user. More specifically in this case, having actor in some of the sequence diagrams, while the others do not, could lead the readers into thinking that the there's some subtle differences in sequence of operations at the start of the sequence diagram. While in reality, there's no difference at all other than the inconsistency on how the diagram was made. Albeit being a small hindrance to the reader, this inconsistency should still be classified as a valid documentation bug in accordance with the screenshot below.
Overall, I believe it is of great importance to have consistency in how the diagrams are made as it would overall improve the quality of the DG.
Some of the sequence diagrams have actors whereas others do not have.
For example, add, edit, and delete command sequence diagrams do not have actors.
Whereas the rest all have actors.
I think it would be better to have consistency on whether to include the actor or not.