You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am genuinely confused as to what the bug is here. The "expected outcome" seems more like a suggestion. There are no extra steps to show to the user to illustrate program behaviour.
The illustration denotes parent-tags with 'p' and child-tags with 'c' and shows clearly the remapping of arrows after the tag is deleted. The most that could have been done is to illustrate each parent tag as such
which does not seem like a direct improvement. For this version, we have to explicitly state that the child nodes 'c1' and 'c2' in both refer to the same nodes. This is automatically implied in the diagram we have used.
We acknowledge that this behaviour is rather complex and the image itself was meant to address this.
As a separate issue, you also highlighted that parent-tag may be difficult to understand but child-tag was not highlighted. It seems quite evident that child-tag is the opposite of parent-tag. The definition for parent-tag is also given in the glossary.
Items for the Tester to Verify
❓ Issue response
Team chose [response.Rejected]
I disagree
Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your reason]
Expected Outcome
The section on
Deleting a tag
can show a step-by-step example to illustrate what happens when a tag is deleted.Description
The section uses terms such as parent-tag that may be difficult for the target user to understand.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: