Open nus-se-script opened 9 months ago
Due to the lack of screenshots and explanation provided on your end, this is our current understanding of your issue.
The definition of invalid is not as narrowly defined as “specifications highlighted in the fields table”. Duplicate persons added can be considered to be invalid as seen in the potential errors table: ”This person already exists in the address book.”
As such, the reported bug of missing the extension of duplicate person is unnecessary as our current extension of invalid input already covers the case of missing duplicate person. Repeating this in another extension does not bring any extra value.
--
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.
Only states invalid particulars. However, particulars are valid. Person just already exists in the address book. Should be an extension.
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S1/pe-interim#3776] [original labels: severity.Low type.DocumentationBug]