soc-pe-bot
commented
2 years ago Team's Response
We added this link back for readers to have an easier time navigating the document but this lapse is not something we should be penalized for as having a link back was never a necessity, but rather a bonus for readers.
We acknowledge this inaccuracy in the Developer Guide but we feel that this would not affect the readability of the UG in any way, hence the very low severity even if the bug is accepted.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.NotInScope]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: As the team has acknowledged, this is an inaccuracy in the DG and hence an error in documentation.
:question: Issue severity
Team chose [severity.VeryLow]
Originally [severity.Low]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: As set out in the CS2103 website, the condition for a flaw being VeryLow is for it to be "purely cosmetic and does not affect usage". However, this flaw is an inaccuracy and error in documentation and thus is not "purely cosmetic". Furthermore, it causes a "minor inconvenience" to those reading the DG who want to quickly navigate between sections. Hence, the flaw fits the Low severity.
It is stated that a link to return to the table of contents is provided at the end of every section, however this is inaccurate. The last link back is on page 4 (of 30 pages), thereafter there are no links back to the table of contents.