Prefix Summary in UG lacks valid and invalid examples

[ncmathan]

The Prefix Summary in UG lacks valid and invalid examples. This can lead to confusion for the user. For example, looking at the summary one might think the parameter Gender is case sensitive and only allows "Male" and not "MALE". Likewise for other parameters like priority

[soc-se-bot]

Team's Response

Thanks for bringing this up! We felt that having valid and invalid examples in the prefix table was unnecessary as the explanations are clear enough and we did not want to bombard our users with too much unmeaningful information. Moreover, it is already mentioned right above the prefix summary that parameters except name are case-insensitive so "Male" is the same as "MALE". This issue would also not impact users too much since they would just input "Male" if they think that that is the accepted value and the product would still work smoothly as usual. Nonetheless, if our users wish to see examples of the parameters anyway, there are plenty of examples throughout the UG and under the commands themselves, which is a more meaningful place to put the examples.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• [ ] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---