Overzealous phone number parsing

[yuechen2001]

Steps to reproduce:

1. Enter this command "add n/James Ho p/(H)1800 1111 2222 e/jamesho@example.com a/123,Clementi Rd, 1234665 t/friend t/colleague"

Expected: Valid phone number Actual: Error is shown below

Good job for the feature! It looks good, here’s something that could be a bug.

• For NUS students, it is quite common for them to have both a home number and a phone number. This is especially important if the student has to be contacted urgently but is unreachable via one of the numbers. Hence, users might want to save two numbers to one contact, but is unable to do so because of how the command is parsed.
• As such, I think the developers can relax the validation checks on acceptable phone numbers, allowing users to tag specific phone numbers (for instance, [M] for mobile numbers).

[soc-pe-bot]

Team's Response

Thanks for the bug report. While this would be a good-to-have, as stated by the CS2103T teaching team on the website, the developer team wanted to prioritise having a secure input without the possibility over having multiple latent use-cases for different users. As such, this is something that we could consider implementing if we had more iterations of the app, and would be considered not in scope.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.NotInScope]

• [ ] I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---