nus-pe-bot
commented
3 years ago Team's Response
For this case, wouldn't the user add more filter parameters so that the number of houses to pull will be reduced? Consider how many houses there are in Singapore and the requirements when selecting a house, would it make sense for the user to not set filters and sort solely on price?
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: While I agree that there may be more than one condition when looking for the house, we should not ignore or omit the ones that actually wants to sort by price and price only, regardless of other filters. It should not be discounted especially since the target audience is "low-to-middle income single users looking to buy resale flats" [emphasis added], which may include (perhaps quite often) people who would be looking for the lowest prices before any other criteria which they are willing to accommodate.
Regardless, what the issue is trying to state is not even about the filtering specificity (i.e. whether it has location and/or other filters set). It is the fact that regardless of the actual sorting price of the houses, only the first 100 matched houses would be retrieved and subsequently sorted. For instance, an entity were to add the top 100 most expensive houses (let say, in the same location: Hougang) before the cheaper housing into the database with the same location. Since the more expensive ones were added first, they would be retrieved from the database, displayed and sorted. Wouldn't that make the sorting function decieving?
In this case, the user would filter by Hougang, and by using the sort function, expect to retrieve the cheapest housing in Hougang within the entire database, but got the 100 most expensive ones, sorted from 100th to 1st instead, just because they were added first.
:question: Issue severity
Team chose [severity.VeryLow]
Originally [severity.Medium]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: This is not purely a UI bug (which is what "very low" is supposed to be), and would therefore minimally be low. Having said that, this is a built-in logic flaw from your program, which means that is inevitable to encounter this bug. Since the criteria for "low" is a rare occurrence of the bug, your program does not fulfill this classification. Instead, this bug would cause some inconvinience to the user, which did not get what was expected from the sort feature. Therefore, the classification should be medium.
Since the find function only finds the first 100 entries in the database, the filtering may cause minor to major inconvinience to users.
When I filter by sorting, I expect a sorting of all housing that should be eligible, instead of only those extracted to a list. This makes the sorting feature more useful. Basically, the scenario is that if I want to sort by lowest to begin with, chances are I want to view the cheapest houses within the entire database and not just within the list.
In the case of having all the expensive housing listed first in the database, there may be difficulty.