Class diagram of `FinancialTracker` component too complex
Opened this issue · 1 comments
Too many of the details are shoved into the same diagram, resulting it appearing very complex and the wording becoming very small. This will make readers very overwhelmed. Some methods like getter or setters could possibly be ignored since they are trivial, and of course include a note about it.
Team's Response
No details provided by team.
The 'Original' Bug
[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]
Complexity of sequence diagrams in DG
Note from the teaching team: This bug was reported during the Part II (Evaluating Documents) stage of the PE. You may reject this bug if it is not related to the quality of documentation.
Some diagrams in the DG like the one shown above are rather large. Perhaps the usage of ref frames as seen here would help breaking down complex diagrams if stuff like certain method calls have to be shown.
Another instance of sequence diagram with a lot of self invocations which makes the diagram very long:
Once again the use of ref frames could be considered to improve readability.
[original: nus-cs2113-AY2122S1/pe-interim#2049] [original labels: severity.Medium type.DocumentationBug]
Their Response to the 'Original' Bug
[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]
We believe that the first diagram is fine as it is. Enough detail must be given for a diagram to serve its proper purpose. We do agree though that the second diagram is a little too long and could be broken down into smaller parts.
Items for the Tester to Verify
❓ Issue duplicate status
Team chose to mark this issue as a duplicate of another issue (as explained in the Team's response above)
- I disagree
Reason for disagreement: The issue referenced as the original issue is talking about sequence diagrams, whereas my issue is regarding your class diagrams, therefore it should not be treated as a duplicate.
❓ Issue severity
Team chose [severity.VeryLow]
Originally [severity.Medium]
- I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]