tzexern / pe Goto Github PK

The link for 3.6.1 Current Implementation redirects you to here instead:

On top of the benefits mentioned in issue #8, maybe reducing the table of contents can reduce the workload of link maintenance as well?

As shown above, the starting block and the destination block is indeed the same. Maybe the error message should indicate that the blocks provided should be supplied such as this:

4.3 Use Cases appears to be incomplete unfortunately :<

Header 1

Header 2

Header 3

As shown above, header 1 to 3 have different capitalizations.
Would it be better if the capitalizations of these headers are standardized for consistency?

As the application suggest, this is an app that is geared towards fast-typists.

The scenario below is a good example for when a small mistake will be intolerable:

This would actually cost more time to retype the same commands to reach to the point where the users are prompted to key in an index just because the user typed too fast and typed something wrongly.
This situation can be seen in other features as well.

Above is part of your team's table of content, this may reduce the readability of the table of contents as it appears cluttered.
Would it better if the sub-sub-sections are excluded instead?

As a fast typists, I would want to get a task done with a single command so that there are no follow up actions required that complicates the procedure.

The application is well-done and serves it function but would it be better if each task can be done in a single command instead of prompting the users multiple times?

Some diagrams are placed right after the features header but some aren't.

The above shows the exact command prompt output that Windows user may see upon starting up the application.

But, under each example of the features, the command prompt layout was not preserved.

Would it be better to include the screenshots of the command prompt instead to keep it consistent with the above section?

This is the provided screenshot for show daily route:

After following from top to bottom, step by step, this is what my output looks like:

The output does not match up even if the UG was followed step by step.

This may be confusing for some users, it may be better to have the exact same screenshots when the the UG is followed step by step.

I'm not sure if the # notation was covered in the lecture for Sequence Diagrams.

As shown in the picture, Finding the route brings you to the section for Routing between blocks as shown below:

Maybe it would be more consistent if the same naming was used under command summary to keep it consistent as the rest of the command summary?