Typos and suggestions about UG/DG

[tsoudibi]

Suggestions:

• add page number in UG/DG.
• in the sequence diagram of DeletePatientCommand in DG, why is there a getPatient(index) operation (which return the name of the patient, but not used) before the deletePatitent(index) operation?
  • getPatient(index) operation looks unnecessary.
  • 
• missing activation of object/class in several sequence diagrams in DG:
  • sequence diagram of Completion Rate Feature:
  • 
  • I also think it would be better if this SD was separated into 2 independent SD.
  • sequence diagram of state-switching mechanism:
  • 
  • also there should have returns from the UI
• Glossary part looks insufficient
  • there is only two glossary provided, but there should be more like patients, todos or more.
• time format not match between UG and code:
  • in UG, the restriction of time format is given as:
  • 
  • however, the error message in the program showed:
  • 
  • Suggest to stick with one of those
• sample output not matching the actual output
  • In the UG, the sample output of the find command is :
  • 
  • which doesn't include tags information. However, in actual output, it does:
  • 
• Not clear about Supported Relative Terms in deadline command in UG:
  • in UG, it said :
  • 
  • however, the Relative Terms like now, next Friday or this weekend are not supported:
  • 

Suggest to have a solid list of Supported Relative Terms in UG. Also there is no description of this feature in DG

Typos:

• in the AddTaskCommand of DG, there is a redundant list point
  • 

[nus-se-script]

Team's Response

Thank you for raising this issue.

Based on the guidelines for PE, we are required to select one of the multiple bugs reported in the issue, as shown below:

We accept that there should be a return from UI back to User, as per what the program does. However, we feel that the severity should be VeryLow instead of Medium, as the omission of the return arrow is a minor documentation flaw that does not significantly impact the understanding or usage of the product. It is unlikely to cause major inconvenience, but we acknowledge that adding the return would enhance completeness.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue severity

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

• [ ] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---