No limit to length of phone numbers

[ongkimlai]

Singapore phone numbers are 8 digits, 10 if include country code, should have a limit on the length of phone number.

[nus-se-bot]

Team's Response

No details provided by team.

The 'Original' Bug

[The team marked this bug as a duplicate of the following bug]

No char limit on phone and no wrapped text

I cannot view the phone number if it is extremely long as it is truncated.

---

_{[original: nus-cs2103-AY2122S2/pe-interim#64] [original labels: severity.Low type.FeatureFlaw]}

Their Response to the 'Original' Bug

[This is the team's response to the above 'original' bug]

The longest possible telephone number has only 15 digits. This just does not make any sense.

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 'Original' Bug is about the phone number being extremely long and it will be truncated due to the UI. However this is different from my bug report.

My report was not as extreme as inputting a number as long as the 'Original' report did, and it did not state anything about the phone number being truncated.

Based on my justifications, my report aims to point out that the phone number should have a 8 or 10 digit limit as the app is meant for use in Singapore (per their UG).

---

❓ Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: Furthermore, based on my justification, Singapore phone numbers are 8 digits, 10 if include country code, should have a limit on the length of phone number., and the team's response, The longest possible telephone number has only 15 digits. This just does not make any sense., it seems that they agree and should have then included a limit of 15 digits.

Therefore, this should not be rejected if they do indeed acknowledge that the longest possible telephone number has only 15 digits.

---

❓ Issue type

Team chose [type.FeatureFlaw]
Originally [type.FunctionalityBug]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---