Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

ISTQB Exam ATA Topic 4 Question 86 Discussion

Actual exam question for ISTQB's ATA exam
Question #: 86
Topic #: 4
[All ATA Questions]

Tax system

A tax system needs to be updated due to new legislation. For a person with a salary of less than 20.000 and who is married, the tax needs to be re-calculated. If the person also has more than two and less than five children, an additional 10% reduction is applicable.

Applying equivalence partitioning to the ''Tax System'' specification, which of the following set of equivalence classes is most effective in testing the processing the number of children?

[K3] 2 credits

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

Contribute your Thoughts:

Eladia
20 days ago
I hope the person with 6 children doesn't have to pay more taxes. That's just cruel, even for a tax system.
upvoted 0 times
...
Charlene
21 days ago
Ah, the joys of tax systems. I bet the developer who wrote this code was just trying to avoid having to deal with the 'more than 5 children' scenario. Option B it is!
upvoted 0 times
Alishia
4 days ago
I think option B is the most effective choice for testing the number of children in the tax system.
upvoted 0 times
...
Joseph
5 days ago
Yeah, it makes sense to test with 2, 4, and 5 children to ensure the tax calculation is correct.
upvoted 0 times
...
Amina
9 days ago
I agree, option B seems to cover the range of children specified in the requirements.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Shelba
27 days ago
Hold up, why are we only testing the number of children? What about the salary and marital status? Shouldn't we be testing those as well? This question is missing some key details.
upvoted 0 times
Dwight
1 days ago
User 2: Maybe they are testing those separately in other test cases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Raelene
11 days ago
User 1: I agree, we should be testing the salary and marital status too.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Sharan
1 months ago
I'm not sure about this one. Shouldn't we test the edge cases of 2 and 5 children? I'm leaning towards option C, just to be on the safe side.
upvoted 0 times
Van
11 hours ago
I agree, option C includes 1 and 3 children which are good edge cases to test.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jesus
23 days ago
I think we should consider testing the edge cases of 2 and 5 children.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lon
2 months ago
Hmm, I think option B is the way to go. Covering the range of 2, 4, and 5 children seems like the most comprehensive approach to testing the number of children.
upvoted 0 times
Hana
4 days ago
Option B seems like the best option to ensure thorough testing of the number of children in the tax system.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desiree
8 days ago
I think option B is the most effective choice for testing the number of children in the tax system.
upvoted 0 times
...
Roosevelt
16 days ago
I agree, option B covers the range of possible scenarios for the number of children.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jerrod
2 months ago
But wouldn't it make more sense to test with a range of children, like in option B?
upvoted 0 times
...
Magnolia
2 months ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is D) 3, 4 and 6 children.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerrod
2 months ago
I think the answer is B) 2, 4 and 5 children.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77