Able to create two patient entries with the same name but different capitalization

[zhoyx]

Steps to reproduce: Assumption: the list of patients are empty

1. Add a new patient with the name John Doeadd-ptn n/John Doe p/98765432 e/jdoe@gmail.com h/1.85 w/70.5 d/Fever st/Outpatient r/No known allergies t/pendingReview

2. Add another patient with the name john Doe with "j" not capitalized and all other data the same add-ptn n/john Doe p/98765432 e/jdoe@gmail.com h/1.85 w/70.5 d/Fever st/Outpatient r/No known allergies t/pendingReview

Expected result:

• As all other data are the same and only capitalization is different and it is likely that both entries are the same person, A user should be shown an error on the second entry and not be allowed to add the other patient.

Actual result:

• However, both users were added into the patient list and thus likely allowing for duplicate entries of the same user.

Screenshots:

[nus-se-bot]

Team's Response

We disagree with the characterization of a duplicate person. For example, van Gogh and Van Gogh can refer to 2 different people. We do not want to narrow the scope of a duplicate person to such a degree and rather leave it to the user to decide.

Items for the Tester to Verify

:question: Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• [x] I disagree

Reason for disagreement:

As stated in the CS2103T website, bugs relating to duplicate detection are valid Feature flaws. I feel that differentiation based on capitalization do not represent how names are treated in the real world as names tend not to be differentiate by capitalization unless you are possible refering to a historic figure as stated in your example. In actual use of the application, it is likely that the names John Doe and John doe refers to the same person. A better way to add an additional layer of duplicate checking would be through possibly also comparing their Emails and phone numbers which tend to uniquely identify users. Thus I believe that the current implementation would likely cause more issues(inclusion of duplications) compared to the limited additional value created in the unlikely scenerio that capitalization is an actual intended differentiating factor by the user rather than an accidental duplicate entry.

Furthermore, the documentation in the User guide does not state the assumption the team is making with regards to duplicate detection. This would lead users to think that duplicate entries are being detected when in actual fact it is not.

---

## :question: Issue severity Team chose [`severity.Low`] Originally [`severity.Medium`] - [x] I disagree **Reason for disagreement:**  I also disagree with the characterisation of severity as capitalization differences across inputs thens to be a common occurrence and so this bug would likely be experienced by the users especially as the number of inputs grows. And the users would not know that duplicates are being added. For instance if two of the same patients are added into the application and the user is not notified, If an update in patient details is conducted on only one of the patient card, when the administrator later goes to use the find feature to look up the patient, there is no way to tell which is the correct updated patient information and which is outdated information. This issue only grows as more of the same user is added to the system

---