ISTQB-CTFL VCE Exam Download

A valid criticism of this report is that the version of the application is missing. The version of the application is an important piece of information that should be included in a defect report, as it helps to identify which release or build of the software product contains the defect. The version of the application can also help to reproduce and debug the defect, as different versions may have different behaviors or features. The other options are not valid criticisms of this report. The priority, the correction description and the developer name are not missing, but rather not applicable for this report. The priority is a measure of how urgently a defect needs to be fixed, which can be assigned by the project manager or the defect tracking system, not by the tester who reports the defect. The correction description and the developer name are information that are added after the defect has been resolved, not when it has been reported. There is no link to the applicable requirement (traceability) is not a valid criticism of this report, because traceability is not a mandatory attribute of a defect report, but rather an optional one. Traceability is a relationship between two or more entities (such as requirements, test cases, defects, etc.) that shows how they are related or dependent on each other. Traceability can help to verify that the requirements are met by the test cases and defects, but it is not essential for reporting a defect. The description is not highlighting the source of the problem is not a valid criticism of this report, because highlighting the source of the problem is not a responsibility of the tester who reports the defect, but rather of the developer who fixes the defect. The description should provide enough information to describe what happened when the defect occurred, such as input values, expected results, actual results, error messages, screenshots, etc., but it does not need to explain why or how it happened. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 140.

In the context of software testing, the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 differentiates between "validation" and "verification" based on their respective focuses in the software development lifecycle. Verification is the process of evaluating a system or component to determine whether the products of a given development phase satisfy the conditions imposed at the start of that phase. In simpler terms, verification is about checking the product against the specified requirements to ensure it was built correctly. Validation, on the other hand, involves evaluating a system or component during or at the end of the development process to determine whether it meets specified requirements for its intended use. This means validation is about ensuring the product fulfills its intended use and meets the needs of the user.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0: ISTQB Official Website

ISTQB Foundation Level Resources v4.0: ASTQB Resources

Static analysis is the process of examining the work products of a software development or testing activity without executing them. Static analysis can be applied to various types of work products, such as requirements, design, code, test cases, etc. However, test plans are not suitable for static analysis, because they are high-level documents that describe the test objectives, scope, strategy, resources, schedule, and risks of a testing project. Test plans are not executable or formalized in a way that static analysis tools can analyze them. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

References: ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.01, Section 2.2.1, page 20; ISTQB® Glossary v4.02, page 45.