Merge aabac55 into 486c029

CS2103-AY1819S1-W16-2 · Oct 17, 2018 · a8dcbbe · a8dcbbe
2 parents 486c029 + aabac55
commit a8dcbbe
Showing 1 changed file with 62 additions and 31 deletions.
diff --git a/docs/DeveloperGuide.adoc b/docs/DeveloperGuide.adoc
@@ -476,7 +476,7 @@ Certain properties of the application can be controlled (e.g App name, logging l
 This section describes the details on how the volunteer management features are implemented.
 
 // tag::exportcert[]
-==== Export Volunteer Certificate
+==== Export Volunteer Certificate [Coming in V1.3]
 The `exportcert` command enables the volunteer manager to export a PDF document (certificate) detailing a volunteer's involvement with the organisation. This is only possible when in the 'volunteer' context. The information included in the certificate are as follows:
 
 * Organisation's logo
@@ -487,52 +487,83 @@ The `exportcert` command enables the volunteer manager to export a PDF document
 
 This is a sample of the exported PDF certificate:
 
+.Sample exported volunteer certificate
+[.thumb]
 image::VolunteerCert.png[width="600"]
 
+
 ===== Intended Implementation
 
 The following is a high level overview of this feature's implementation:
 
-* Inclusion of supported `exportcert` command.
+* Creation of supported `exportcert` command.
 * Retrieval of the specified volunteer's details.
 * Creation of a new PDF document using Apache PDFBox.
-* Export of the PDF document to a certs folder.
+* Export of the PDF document to a 'certs' folder.
 
 ===== Design Considerations
 
-====== Aspect: Medium of Presentation
-
-* **Alternative 1 (current choice):** Export as PDF.
-** Pros: Exports volunteer details in a convenient format for immediate use and distribution.
-** Cons: PDF template has to be set within the application.
-
-* **Alternative 2:** Display volunteer data in a window within the application.
-** Pros: Allows the volunteer manager flexibility as to what to do with the volunteer details. This could include manually inputting it into an existing certificate creation application, or a document template.
-** Cons: Requires more manual work on the volunteer manager's side, especially when the process can be automated to enhance his/her productivity. Certificate templates are also infrequently updated, and thus the costs in terms of efficiency outweigh the benefits in terms of flexibility.
-
-====== Aspect: Choice of PDF Creation Tool
-
-* **Alternative 1 (current choice):** Apache PDFBox
-** Pros: Open source, offers more specific functionality for PDFs than Apache FOP, covers all of the pdf creation and manipulation functionality required for this feature.
-** Cons: Not the most efficient for creating PDFs (refer to http://abhishekkumararya.blogspot.com/2013/09/comparison-of-java-based-pdf-generation.html[this comparison study]).
+====== Aspect: Medium of presentation
 
-* **Alternative 2:** Apache FOP
-** Pros: Open source, allows for conversion and formatting of XML data to PDF.
-** Cons: Resource intensive, not the most efficient for PDF creation, and lacks features such as updating and merging PDFs.
+* *Alternative 1 (current choice):* Export as PDF
++
+[cols="1,10"]
+|===
+|*Pros*| Exports volunteer details in a convenient format for immediate use and distribution.
+|*Cons*| PDF template has to be preset within the application.
+|===
++
+* *Alternative 2:* Display volunteer data in a window within the application
++
+[cols="1,10"]
+|===
+|*Pros*| Allows the volunteer manager flexibility as to what to do with the volunteer details. This could include manually inputting it into an existing certificate creation application, or a document template.
+|*Cons*| Requires more manual work on the volunteer manager's side, especially when the process can be automated to enhance his/her productivity. Certificate templates are also infrequently updated, and thus the costs in terms of efficiency outweigh the benefits in terms of flexibility.
+|===
 
-* **Alternative 3:** iText
-** Pros: Fastest of the lot for PDF generation (refer to http://abhishekkumararya.blogspot.com/2013/09/comparison-of-java-based-pdf-generation.html[this comparison study]).
-** Cons: Now only available as a free trial, requires a license.
+====== Aspect: Choice of PDF creation tool
 
-====== Aspect: Identifying Volunteer from Certificate
+* *Alternative 1 (current choice):* Apache PDFBox
++
+[cols="1,10"]
+|===
+|*Pros*| Open source, offers more specific functionality for PDFs than Apache FOP, and covers all of the pdf creation and manipulation functionality required for this feature.
+|*Cons*| Not the most efficient for creating PDFs (refer to http://abhishekkumararya.blogspot.com/2013/09/comparison-of-java-based-pdf-generation.html[this comparison study]).
+|===
++
+* *Alternative 2:* Apache FOP
++
+[cols="1,10"]
+|===
+|*Pros*| Open source, allows for conversion and formatting of XML data to PDF.
+|*Cons*| Resource intensive, not the most efficient for PDF creation, and lacks features such as updating and merging PDFs.
+|===
++
+* *Alternative 3:* iText
++
+[cols="1,10"]
+|===
+|*Pros*| Fastest of the lot for PDF generation (refer to http://abhishekkumararya.blogspot.com/2013/09/comparison-of-java-based-pdf-generation.html[this comparison study]).
+|*Cons*| Now only available as a free trial, and requires a license for extended use.
+|===
 
-* **Alternative 1 (current choice):** Use Volunteer's NRIC
-** Pros: Is unique to each volunteer and can be recovered easily, given the volunteer's name or other personal information. It also adds credibility to the exported volunteer certificate.
-** Cons: Requires more space as each NRIC can be represented as string of length 9 or a 7-digit integer.
+====== Aspect: Choice of additional details for identifying volunteer from certificate
 
-* **Alternative 2:** Use a Volunteer ID
-** Pros: Shorter than NRIC and still serves the purpose, and can be auto-incremented.
-** Cons: Hard to recover, even if additional information about the volunteer is provided. Would also be meaningless to a third person to whom the certificate is presented for verification purposes.
+* *Alternative 1 (current choice):* Display Volunteer's NRIC
++
+[cols="1,10"]
+|===
+|*Pros*| Is unique to each volunteer and can be recovered easily, given the volunteer's name or other personal information. It also adds additional verifiability to the exported volunteer certificate.
+|*Cons*| Requires more space as each NRIC can be represented as string of length 9 or a 7-digit integer.
+|===
++
+* *Alternative 2:* Display Volunteer ID
++
+[cols="1,10"]
+|===
+|*Pros*| Shorter than NRIC and achieves the intended purpose. Internally, it can be auto-incremented as well.
+|*Cons*| Hard to recover, even if additional information about the volunteer is provided. It would also be meaningless to a third person to whom the certificate is presented for verification purposes.
+|===
 
 // end::exportcert[]