Exam CTAL-TA_V4.0 Topic 1 Question 28 Discussion
Actual exam question for ISQI's CTAL-TA_V4.0 exam
Question #: 28
Topic #: 1
Question #: 28
Topic #: 1
A system will be developed to support the administration of table-tennis tournaments. The following requirements for the enrolment of entrants have been provided:
R1. High. The administrator shall be able to enter the entrant's name, address, phone number/s (mobile and/or home), email and social media handles. Validation rules for these data items are provided separately.
R2. High. The administrator shall be able to enter the entrant's current world ranking (up to 250) and their relationship with the tournament sponsors (i.e. clothing / equipment / endorsement).
R3. High. The administrator shall be able to enter the entrant's attendance history at previous events (i.e.
finalist / played / withdrew during event / withdrew before event).
R4. Medium. From the entrant's address the system shall derive whether or not the entrant lives locally and, on the basis of that combined with other rules that are provided separately, shall suggest how much of the tournament's overall prize fund should be offered to the entrant as their individual attendance fee.
R5. Low. The administrator should be able to change the suggested attendance fee and the system should then deduct this from the remaining prize fund balance accordingly.
You have been asked to review the requirements using perspective-based reading, from your viewpoint as the TA who will be writing functional correctness system test cases. Assume that the other rules referred to by requirements R1 and R4 have been reviewed and are satisfactorily testable. Which conclusion would you reach?
R1. High. The administrator shall be able to enter the entrant's name, address, phone number/s (mobile and/or home), email and social media handles. Validation rules for these data items are provided separately.
R2. High. The administrator shall be able to enter the entrant's current world ranking (up to 250) and their relationship with the tournament sponsors (i.e. clothing / equipment / endorsement).
R3. High. The administrator shall be able to enter the entrant's attendance history at previous events (i.e.
finalist / played / withdrew during event / withdrew before event).
R4. Medium. From the entrant's address the system shall derive whether or not the entrant lives locally and, on the basis of that combined with other rules that are provided separately, shall suggest how much of the tournament's overall prize fund should be offered to the entrant as their individual attendance fee.
R5. Low. The administrator should be able to change the suggested attendance fee and the system should then deduct this from the remaining prize fund balance accordingly.
You have been asked to review the requirements using perspective-based reading, from your viewpoint as the TA who will be writing functional correctness system test cases. Assume that the other rules referred to by requirements R1 and R4 have been reviewed and are satisfactorily testable. Which conclusion would you reach?
Suggested Answer: A Vote an answer
The correct answer is A . Using perspective-based reading, the TA must review the requirements from the viewpoint of someone who must derive functional correctness test cases. CTAL-TA v4.0 states that perspective-based reading requires reviewers to attempt to use the test basis to generate the work product they would derive from it; for a tester, that means attempting to create tests and checking whether all necessary information is present.
R1 is testable because the data-entry items are listed and the validation rules are explicitly provided separately and assumed testable. R4 is also testable because the derivation and attendance-fee rules are separately provided and assumed testable. R5 is testable as a functional rule: change the suggested attendance fee, then verify that the remaining prize fund balance is reduced accordingly.
The weak requirements are R2 and R3 . R2 does not fully define the valid model for "relationship with the tournament sponsors": it is unclear whether clothing, equipment, and endorsement are mutually exclusive, whether multiple relationships may apply, or whether "no relationship" is valid. R3 is also incomplete because "attendance history at previous events" is not fully defined: it is unclear whether this is one value, multiple event records, or a history per event, and some values overlap conceptually, such as finalist and played. These gaps prevent complete functional correctness test design. Reference: CTAL-TA v4.0, Sections
5.2.2 Applying Review Techniques and 1.2.1 Test Analysis .
R1 is testable because the data-entry items are listed and the validation rules are explicitly provided separately and assumed testable. R4 is also testable because the derivation and attendance-fee rules are separately provided and assumed testable. R5 is testable as a functional rule: change the suggested attendance fee, then verify that the remaining prize fund balance is reduced accordingly.
The weak requirements are R2 and R3 . R2 does not fully define the valid model for "relationship with the tournament sponsors": it is unclear whether clothing, equipment, and endorsement are mutually exclusive, whether multiple relationships may apply, or whether "no relationship" is valid. R3 is also incomplete because "attendance history at previous events" is not fully defined: it is unclear whether this is one value, multiple event records, or a history per event, and some values overlap conceptually, such as finalist and played. These gaps prevent complete functional correctness test design. Reference: CTAL-TA v4.0, Sections
5.2.2 Applying Review Techniques and 1.2.1 Test Analysis .
by Hilary at Sep 21, 2026, 12:09 PM
0
0
0
10
Comments
Upvoting a comment with a selected answer will also increase the vote count towards that answer by one. So if you see a comment that you already agree with, you can upvote it instead of posting a new comment.
Report Comment
Commenting
You can sign-up / login (it's free).