History feature explanantion is too brief and unclear

[sdevih]

Description

The explanation for the history command is too brief and not clear, as there are 2 differing behaviours. THe history INDEX can only be used after inputting the history command, but this is not made clear in the user guide and their expected behaviour is too verbose with technical terms. Thus users may find it hard to understand how these 2 commands are different, and also how they work together, and will take time for users to figure out how the w

Screenshots

[nus-se-script]

Team's Response

Thanks for your feedback!

THe history INDEX can only be used after inputting the history command

Actually, it still works without doing history command first, since the command history list is always there, just not visible at any point you didn't run the history command. Hence why when we say in the UG: "Upon enter history [INDEX], the index here refers to the index number shown in the command history list.", there was an assumption that the user has already entered history command to view the list and see which command to re-run. But you are right that the documentation could've been made clearer.

their expected behaviour is too verbose with technical terms.

I assume you were referring to the commands that you're seeing in the command history list. We agree that it is not user-friendly at this moment and that has been addressed in point 1 of our "Planned Enhancements".

Items for the Tester to Verify

❓ Issue response

Team chose [response.NotInScope]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: [replace this with your explanation]

---