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.
For all the use cases given, there is no clear segmentation between which use case is applicable to which person type being referred to. For example, UC2 which is editing of a person, there is no documented check whether the person type is correct before editing of the attributes takes place. Same for UC1 where despite UG saying that there is specified attributes applicable to only a specified person types, it is not apparent in the UC for the 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.
For all the use cases given, there is no clear segmentation between which use case is applicable to which person type being referred to. For example, UC2 which is editing of a person, there is no documented check whether the person type is correct before editing of the attributes takes place. Same for UC1 where despite UG saying that there is specified attributes applicable to only a specified person types, it is not apparent in the UC for the DG.
[original: nus-cs2103-AY2324S2/pe-interim#1097] [original labels: severity.Low type.DocumentationBug]