Incomplete diagram in storage class diagram.

[tau-bar]

Expected:

• Expected Behaviour: The dotted line should have an arrow or attached to something.

Actual:

• Actual Behaviour: The dotted line stops in the middle of the diagram.

• Why that severity? Might cause developers some confusion as to whether it is an interface implementation or something else.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Go to archive an appointment section in DG implementation details section.

Screenshots:

[nus-pe-bot]

Team's Response

It is already clearly shown in the Storage section of our DG that StorageManager implements the Storage interface. In this case, we chose not to include the Storage interface as it is likely to add unnecessary details to what we are trying to demonstrate here, i.e. that StorageManager references 1 ArchivedAppointmentBookStorage alongside the 3 other interfaces. At most, the severity should be VeryLow as developers can always refer to the Storage class diagram to clear confusion.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• [x] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: ### Response

I disagree.

Rationale

If the developer team wanted to omit the fact that the StorageManager implements the Storage interface, they could have omitted the dotted line, but they did not. This did not seem like an intentional omission of details, but rather an oversight, one which does cause an inconvenience though minor (which is classified as a severity.Low on the module website) to the developers reading who may be confused about the conflicting ideas between the paragraph and the preceding diagram. Therefore, this is still a bug.

Screenshots

---

:question: Issue severity

Team chose [severity.VeryLow] Originally [severity.Low]

• [x] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: ### Response

I think this should remain a severity.Low bug.

Rationale

As mentioned by the module website, a severity.Low bug is one that causes a rare minor inconvenience to the developer. I acknowledge that this bug is minor, but it does cause an inconvenience, as developers might be confused by the conflicting ideas between the paragraph and the preceding diagram. Therefore, I believe it should still be classified as a low bug.

Screenshots

---