search

yashpola / pe

0 stars 0 forks source link

Misleading `AddressBook` attribute in `Model` class diagram for Section 4.1.4 of `AddCommand` #12

Open yashpola opened 2 months ago

yashpola commented 2 months ago

Description

The DG shows that the Model interface has a private AddressBook of type addressBook but this is nowhere to be seen in the actual Model code. Nor does Model inherit from anything that has an AddressBook field. This can be misleading. Similar issue for NoteCommand

Diagram in DG

image.png

Actual Code

image.png

nus-pe-bot commented 2 months ago

Team's Response

Dear tester, we sincerely acknowledge this issue and we accept it, however, we would like to propose a change to the severity. <3

severity.Low : A flaw that is unlikely to affect normal operations of the product. Appears only in very rare situations and causes a minor inconvenience only.

We would like to change the severity to low because the error is quite minor; it can be resolved if we replace the "model" interface with "model manager" class instead. It does not affect the reader to the extend of medium (A flaw that causes occasional inconvenience to some reader, but they can continue to use the DG.) As it is unlikely to affect normal operations of the DG

Thank you

Yours Sincerely, JAYME

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue severity

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

Reason for disagreement: If severity.Low means "A flaw that is unlikely to affect normal operations of the product.", then I do not feel that this error (which occurs in more than one place) fits this severity for a documentation bug. When I perused the developer guide and came across this error, I had to stop in my tracks and minimally do the following:

  1. Question whether I was misinterpreting the class diagram.
  2. Check if I was viewing the code correctly and I didn't miss the addressbook field in any of the 76 lines of the Model interface.
  3. Search through all 75 lines of the AddCommand to locate the origin of this association.
  4. Search through the model package to find a corresponding interface that actually had an addressbook field.

This, in my view, palpably affects the normal usage of a Developer Guide and causes "occasional inconvenience" even if I could continue to use the rest of the DG.

For this reason I argue that it is more appropriate that this bug stay at severity.Medium