nus-pe-bot
commented
3 years ago Team's Response
Reason for "rejecting" and changing the severity to "VeryLow" and changing to bug type to "DocumentationBug": Documentation could be rephrased to "phone numbers must be longer than at least 3 digits" to accurately describe the requirement for a valid phone number. However, the user guide never explicitly stated that only 8 digit number combinations are allowed. Also, it is true that the phone number can be any 8 digit number combinations as stated in the user guide and this does not affect the usage.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: Even though the user guide does not say "the phone number can only be 8 digits", it says that the phone number "can be any 8 digit number combinations". Almost all users would interpret this to mean that it cannot be any other number of digits. Hence, most users would be confused as to why they are able to add non-8 digit phone numbers, which affects app usage. Then, after they realise that they can add non-8 digit phone numbers, they would be further confused if they cannot add a phone number which is less than 3 digits. Hence, I believe that this is a bug and should not have been rejected.
:question: Issue type
Team chose [type.DocumentationBug]
Originally [type.FunctionalityBug]
- [ ] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]
:question: Issue severity
Team chose [severity.VeryLow]
Originally [severity.Low]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: The actual documentation which implies that only 8 digit phone numbers are allowed is very different than the actual stipulation, which is that only phone numbers with more than 3 digits are allowed. Hence, this bug would cause many users to become confused when using the app, and is not purely cosmetic. Thus, I believe that it should be of Low severity.
input: add n/John p/000000000 [9 0s] ic/s1234567a
input: add n/John p/0000000 [7 0s] ic/s1234567a