soc-pe-bot
commented
2 months ago Team's Response
Distinction between two students under the list function is inconsequential since no other details about the students are shown. Knowing which student is which at that point in time provides no additional value. Should one need to be able to get access to the right "Adam", the other commands (edit, delete, archive etc.) account for that by printing their phone number and asking for the right identification.
Items for the Tester to Verify
:question: Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
- [x] I disagree
Reason for disagreement: I disagree that this is an invalid bug.
The developers invalidates the issue by claiming "Distinction between two students under the list function is inconsequential since no other details about the students are shown."
From the perspective of a user, such distinction is important especially when the list manages information of the very source of business - the students themselves. It is crucial to recognise unique individuals especially since this list can eventually be used for further manipulation by the tuition center in terms of documentation and admin work, without which, tuition center have to go through a complicated process of distinguishing individuals after this stage.
Not only that, in the very same list method where you list students with the total class attended,
you can observe that no such distinction is made. Perhaps the issue is clearer here, where you have 2 exact entries with the same details for a method that is supposed to list the details of students.
Hence, I disagree that this bug should be invalidated.
As seen from above, I was able to add 2 students called Adam to the list, without any distinction, which will be very confusing for the user when trying to interprete the list. There should be some form of distinction when inputting the name.
However, given that the programme is still able to allow for the identifying of individual students through their phone number, I will be giving this a severity of low.