search

maze508 / pe

1 stars 0 forks source link

Schedule restrictive naming validation #12

Open maze508 opened 2 months ago

maze508 commented 2 months ago

Details

We are not allowed to add schedules of the same title, however, it is common for us to have multiple same appointments at a different time, for e.g I visit the dermatologist every 3 months, but I can only have 1 Visit Dermatologist schedule for tomorrow and not in 3 months time because they are the same event

Steps to Reproduce

  1. schedule add h/Visit Dermatologist t/5/14/2024 0930 d/Discuss project details n/John Doe
  2. schedule add h/Visit Dermatologist t/9/14/2024 0930 d/Discuss project details n/John Doe (Error here)
nus-se-bot commented 2 months ago

Team's Response

Since this app is catered to social workers we see that it might be rare for them to have the same appointment headings. Moreover, since they are aware that unique headings are required they can create simple workarounds like adding a number to their appointment, eg: meet alex1 and meet alex2, therefore this seems like not a huge issue, thus we recommend reducing the severity to Low.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue severity

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

Reason for disagreement: ### 1. Frequent Occurrence of Repetitive Appointments The application is specifically crafted for social workers, a group that routinely encounters repetitive appointments as part of their professional responsibilities. Examples such as "Weekly Supervision", "Daily Team Debrief" and "Meeting with Client" are common and expected events and I disagree with the team's statement that repetitive appointment names are rare. In the realm of social work, not only is the repetition of appointment names common, but in fact a frequent/common occurrence. The inability to schedule such standard, repetitive appointments without workarounds significantly detracts from the application's utility.

2. Impact on Usability and Error Margin

This bug's impact extends beyond simply inconvenience, it introduces a real potential for error in an environment where accuracy is crucial. The added workload of deciphering duplicate appointment names can lead to scheduling errors, miscommunications, and ultimately, a disservice to the clients.

3. Impracticality of the Proposed Workaround

Additionally, the teams suggestion to append numbers to appointment titles does not hold up under the complex demands of social work. For instance, consider a social worker managing several cases needing "Bi-Weekly Welfare Check" or "Quarterly Health Review". Numerical differentiators do not convey context or meaning and can lead to confusion and errors, such as mistaking "Welfare Check1" for "Welfare Check2".

Conclusion

Given the frequency with which repetitive appointments occur within social work, the impracticality of the suggested workaround, and how the bug directly impacts the usability and core functionality of the application for its intended users. I think it is fair to retain the original Medium severity to ensure that the feature aligns with the real-world needs of social workers, facilitating their day-to-day operations without unnecessary complications.