Lacking extension for unmark attendance

[ongweijie7]

Does not include the situation when the attendance is already unmarked.

[soc-pe-bot]

Team's Response

This issue is covered in the User Guide.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• [x] I disagree

Reason for disagreement:

I believe including such an implementation would be important, especially if I was a developer that is looking to maintain and evolve you code, I would need to understand how you went about designing the interaction between users and the system as mentioned in the screenshot picture above.

Moreover, there is a lack of consistency between your use cases for mark and unmark. Since both of them should behave in a similar manner when an attendance is mark/unmark already and the extension is available formark 's use case(as seen below), why not include this extension in unmark to be clearer and consistent? I believe this will be confusing for a developer who sees the inconsistency after reading both the developer guide and user guide, hence it is a valid bug.

---