Analysis Of Australian And International Software Testing Standards And Comparison Of Test Management Tools

locate two current documents for one national standard and one international standard that relate to software testing
? research, comprehend and analyze each document to find relevant details to answer a set of questions, and
? prepare a written summary report of findings
Commence your search for standards at the Federation University website. There is a listing of Databases AZ 

Note: If you are on campus, just clicking on the link will send you through to the database. If you are off-campus, you will need to authenticate with your logon details Your search should target published standards, not drafts. You can include any of the following but you are not limited to:

Software engineering - Product quality - Quality model Information technology - Software packages - Quality equirements and testing Software engineering - Software product Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) -
Common Industry Format (CIF) for usability test reports 

Select and research one Australian and one international standard relating to software testing to ascertain the answers to the following questions. Be sure to check appendices in these documents as they can be very helpful. Your answers should illustrate a good understanding of the standard documents you select.
For each standard
? What is the standard name?
? Who holds the copyright for the standard?
? Amongst the acknowledged contributors to the document, which universities were involved (if any)?
? What is the scope or intent of the standard?
? What are the key terms and understandings needed for the standard to be understood and applied?
? In your own words, what does the application of the standard result in? Or in other words,what does the standard do? 

? Finally, what specific relevance to software testing is the standard?Make a comparison of the two standards.
? Relate any commonalities between your two selected standards
? Highlight any significant differences in their approach and applications.

Part-B: Test Management Tool
You have to present a comparative analysis between any two of the following Test Management Tools:
The analysis should include:
? Common features
? Special features

The student should create the free account in both the selected tools to explore thoroughly.Prepare a report of no more than 2,000 words answering all questions. The report should have the following structure.
? an introduction to standards and a brief description of the two standards researched
? responses to questions for each standard
? listing and a discussion of commonalities and differences between the two standards
? listing the common and special features of two selected test management tools
? a conclusion summarizing the report findings 

Selected Standards

Standards are created for checking the quality of the product, leading to the fact that a proper quality of the products are maintained and people using the product use a certified and standard product in order to stay away from any kind of fraud. This is the reason that the service management. Australian standards are set for the completion of standardization of the products and services that are provided in the course of completion of the project.

This is the reason that only verified products are present in Australian market. This report will discuss about the brief methodologies of the Australian software testing standards. This report will also discuss about the terminologies present in the prosecution of the international standard determination methodologies. This report will also provide a brief comparison in between the data that is present in the course of Australian standards and the international standard.

Response to the Questions

The chosen standards that will be reviewed and compared are as follows: -

• AS/NZS ISO/IEC 25062:2006 Software engineering - Software product Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) - Common Industry Format (CIF) for usability test reports (Dunkerley, 2018)
• ISO 829 Software documentation standards

Questionnaire

• What is the standard name?

Standard name of AS/NZS ISO/IEC 25062:2006 is Software product Quality Requirements and Evaluation. Generally they are termed as SQuaRE (Fransson, Gallant & Shanks, 2018).

ISO 829 Software documentation standards is also known as 829 Standard for Software and System Test Documentation.

• Who holds the copyright for the standard?

The copyright of Standard name of  is protected by ISO copyright office. This is published by the Switzerland and the exact location of their office is in Case Postal 56, CH-1211, Geneva 20 (Elliott & Jeavons, 2014).

ISO ISO 829 Software documentation standards has its copyright by IEEE Std 829™-2008 and the revision of the copyright is done from IEEE Std 829-1998. The area of the ccopyright provisioning office is located in 3 Park Avenue New York, NY 10016-5997, USA. 

• Amongst the acknowledged contributors to the document, which universities were involved (if any)?

Australian Senate Economics Reference Committee has helped in completing the projection of Australian and International Standard. This has helped in projection of the entire project and completion of the project would not have been completed.

What is the scope or intent of the standard?

The project deals with the progression of the previously set standard, for the completion of the data based project. The main processing of the data management helps in the processing of the standard setting of products. Main scope of the project is to describe the projection of standard setting (McKenzie, 2018). The main scope and intend of this project is to create am in depth conceptual data regression of International as well as the Australian standard setting methodologies. This is due to the fact that the quality of the product that are being imported in their country as well as in international aspect.

• What are the key terms and understandings needed for the standard to be understood and applied?

Key terminologies which are required for completion of project are as follows: -

• Usability: in case of testing the terminologies which are obligatory for accomplishment of the project quality management, the main aspect is the usability of the product. This hints to the datum that the data prosecution might be accomplished in the completion of the project. Entire process is dependent on the usability of the product (Butler & Choo, 2016).
• Effectiveness: Effectiveness of the project plays an important role in completion of the project. Leading to the fact that the product is processed with the effective nature of the product. In case the effective nature of the product is least then the product does not pass the quality standard test
• Efficiency: Efficiency of the project is one of the major check post that is accessed by the Australian as well as the international standards for seeking the importance of the project. this is the reason that implies the fact that the product does not pass the standard tests
• Satisfaction: Satisfaction if client after usage of the product is also one of the major factors for getting the products allowed.
• Context of Use: products that are processed in the standard testing, the major use that is made with help of data management has been performed with the help of usage context. This points to the strategic terminology that the data supervision is prepared with the help of client review
• Users: efficiency of the product is dependent on the users that are using the product. This leads to the fact that the standard setting of the product is completely processed with the help of the number of users using the product
• User scope: the need of the product is also one of the major reason for getting the permission of launching the product
• Goal task accessibility: Goal of the product also acts as the major permissibility check. In case the goal of the product is not very clear allowance of the process will not be present.
• Assistive technology: Technology that is present in the building of the product acts as one of the major quality checks. In case the technological advancement is not present in the products, the product does not pass the test (Edmonds, Cashin & Heartfield, 2016)

In your own words, what does the application of the standard result in? Or in other words, what does the standard do?

Main functionality of the Australian standard is to check the excellence of the product that will be launched in the market as the statistics that are contemporary scenario in the course of informations is that the quality check of the product ensures the projection of data management, leading to the fact that the quality of the product that is being launched in the market will be very efficient in nature and the product will not affect the audience in a negative way. 

Response to the Questions

Discussing differences

In case of the testing methodology of AS/NZS ISO/IEC 25062:2006, the testing methodology that is used is that the documentation of the entire project is initially made, leading to the detail regarding the data administration is completed with the help of the project management. On other hand, the ISO 829 Software documentation standard deals with the processing of the product initially ad after completion of the product testing analyzing of the product with respect to the data management of the customer review.

In case of ISO 829 Software documentation standard several changes are made since the processing of the product and this is one of the reason that implies the fact that the data management will be done with the altered versions whereas in case of AS/NZS ISO/IEC 25062:2006, no changes and alteration is made, and the implementation of the AS/NZS ISO/IEC 25062:2006 is made worldwide (Wells, 2015).

Both the AS/NZS ISO/IEC 25062:2006 and ISO 829 Software documentation standard has the same terminologies acting as the major check post, foremost to the detail that the data management will be performed with utmost efficiency (Waddell, 2015)

Task 2

            2 testing methodologies that are reviewed and compared are as follows: -

• Test Rail
• Spira Test

Comparison in between Test Rail and Spira Test are as follows: -

In case of Spira test step by step completion of the project can be performed, leading to the fact that the data with utmost efficient management and the completion of the work can be processed with higher accuracy. Again in case of Test rail, the processing of integration along with the confluence of the products are performed and the tools that are used in this methodology are homemade and automated in nature. This is a major reason that the projection of best Rail can be performed 24/7 and the business management is much more efficient in nature. Complex procedure of creating the test run is not taken into consideration, and this testing methodology also has the ability to check the processing of the product and compare the same with the other business models.

In case of Spira Testing as well as in the Test Rail testing methodology, the main focus of the methodology is to secure the product and check the dispensation of statistics administration, foremost to the fact that the data administration will be achieved with the utmost proficiency. This is the major aim that the dispensation of data management can be achieved with the help of test organizations.    

Another major advantage of Spira testing that is not present in the course of data management is that the Spira testing will provide the processing of data management will be done with the help of script adding and this will be performed with the help of data management. This is one of the major reason that the efficiency of Spira testing is so high but in case of Test Rail, the major advantage it enjoys is the processing of data management with the help of the estimation of the data that will be allotted to the system. This is the major reason that the accuracy of the Test Rail is lower than that of Spira testing. This leads to the fact that the data management of Spira testing is better than that of Test Rail.  

Comparison of Test Management Tools

In case of Test Rail, exporting pf word is not possible which creates a major impact on the processing of the testing methodology. Where as in case of Spira testing exporting of word is possible and this is the sole reason that the testing methodology is performed with both Spira testing methodology as well as the Test Rail methodology. Creating test scenario is also one of the main advantage of Spira testing methodology but it is not possible in that the of the Test Rail testing methodology.

Pricing of Spira test methodology is very well organized and the cost that is to be incurred is very well contrasted with the processing of the testing methodology. This methodology has the best in class pricing strategy and this is one of the major reason of using Spira testing. In case of using the Test Rail processing, the price that is experienced in the conclusion of the challenging methodology is also very competent in nature and this is the main reason that will incur the dispensation of testing administration. In case of Test Rail, the main prospect is that the data administration is treated with highest efficiency. This clues to the fact that the data supervision can be done with the help of least pricing strategy.

Marketing strategy of Spira testing is very good. This clues to the detail that the information that are to be shared among the global audience is used for projection of informations management. This leads to the fact that the clients stay informed regarding the processing of management. This is the aim that the processing of the statistics management can be done. In case of Test Rail, the main drawback that it faces is the lack of marketing that is present in the processing of the testing methodologies that are provided by the Test Rail testing Methodology Company. This is one of the major reason that the clients that are associated with the Test Rail Company, stay unaware of the functioning of the Test Rail Company. This is the reason that the expansion of Test Rail testing methodology has not been flourishing.

Conclusion

From the above report it can be concluded that the projection of the cost that is incurred in the processing of the testing methodology acts as one of the major advantage of the business processing. The quality and the specifications that are to be maintained in the products are stated in the Australian standards. This ensures the fact that the products that will be imported in Australia will have to go through a testing schema and only if the product passes all the quality check, the probation of the products are checked and the products are permitted to enter the Australian market.

References

Bailon, C., Damas, M., Pomares, H., & Banos, O. (2018). SPIRA: an automatic system to support lower limb injury assessment. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 1-13.

Butler, A., & Choo, K. K. R. (2016). IT standards and guides do not adequately prepare IT practitioners to appear as expert witnesses: An Australian perspective. Security Journal, 29(2), 306-325.

Dunkerley, C. (2018). Australian input into international security standards. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, The, 33(3), 13.

Edmonds, L., Cashin, A., & Heartfield, M. (2016). Comparison of Australian specialty nurse standards with registered nurse standards. International nursing review, 63(2), 162-179.

Elliott, S., & Jeavons, M. (2014). How high was Humpty Dumpty?: Revised Australian playground equipment and surfacing standards. Every Child, 20(4), 6.

Fransson, G., Gallant, A., & Shanks, R. (2018). Human elements and the pragmatic approach in the Australian, Scottish and Swedish standards for newly qualified teachers. Journal of Educational Change, 19(2), 243-267.

Fransson, G., Gallant, A., & Shanks, R. (2018). Human elements and the pragmatic approach in the Australian, Scottish and Swedish standards for newly qualified teachers. Journal of Educational Change, 19(2), 243-267.

Garay, O. U., Elorrio, E. G., Rodríguez, V., Spira, C., Augustovski, F., & Pichon-Riviere, A. (2017). Single-Use Devices in Argentina: Cost Comparison Analysis of a “Re-Use” versus a “Single-Use” Policy for Trocars, Endocutters, Linear Cutters, and Harmonic Scalpels. Value in health regional issues, 14, 89-95.

MANSOUR, K., & PATTI, F. (2017). Use of mining magnetic material as filler to promote induction healing in smart road pavement applications.

McKenzie, G. J. (2018). Design criteria for blast loadings in the Australian environment with special reference to controlled and uncontrolled implosions.

Moon, S. (2016). Self-heating of Sulphide Ores, Transition from Stage A to B and Evaluating Reliability of UN Test Protocol (Doctoral dissertation, McGill University).

Thoen, M. P., Davila Olivas, N. H., Kloth, K. J., Coolen, S., Huang, P. P., Aarts, M. G., ... & Bucher, J. (2017). Genetic architecture of plant stress resistance: multi?trait genome?wide association mapping. New Phytologist, 213(3), 1346-1362.

Waddell, M. (2015). A new era for Australian Standards General Conditions of Contract. CONSTRUCTION LAW INTERNATIONAL, 10(2).

Wells, L. (2015). Online pharmacies: a consumer perspective. Australian prescriber, 38(6), 187. Wells, L. (2015). Online pharmacies: a consumer perspective. Australian prescriber, 38(6), 187.