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
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

IIBA ECBA Exam - Topic 1 Question 99 Discussion

What requirements are good candidates for reuse?
A) Requirements without direct ties to a particular tool
B) Requirements expressed in more detail
C) Requirements at low levels of abstraction
D) Requirements with specific references to departments

IIBA ECBA Exam - Topic 1 Question 99 Discussion

Actual exam question for IIBA's ECBA exam
Question #: 99
Topic #: 1
[All ECBA Questions]

What requirements are good candidates for reuse?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

Requirements that are good candidates for reuse are those that are not tied to a specific tool, technology, or system. These requirements are generally applicable across various contexts and can be used in multiple projects without significant changes. They are typically high-level business requirements that describe what the business needs without prescribing how to achieve it. This makes them flexible and adaptable to different situations, which is essential for reuse.


by Kristel at Sep 19, 2024, 04:52 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ECBA Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Elli
8 months ago
Wait, can we really reuse requirements without tool ties? Sounds risky.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cherelle
8 months ago
D is too specific, not reusable at all!
upvoted 0 times
...
Martina
9 months ago
C seems like a solid choice too, low abstraction is key.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lorrie
9 months ago
I disagree, B can also be reused if detailed enough.
upvoted 0 times
...
Karon
9 months ago
A is definitely a good candidate for reuse!
upvoted 0 times
...
Estrella
9 months ago
I definitely recall that requirements tied to specific departments are usually not reusable, so D seems like a no-go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elza
10 months ago
I feel like detailed requirements might be more specific and less reusable, but I could be mixing that up with another topic.
upvoted 0 times
...
Donette
10 months ago
I remember a practice question that mentioned low levels of abstraction being less reusable, so I might lean towards option A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lanie
10 months ago
I think requirements without direct ties to a particular tool could be good for reuse, but I'm not entirely sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mitsue
10 months ago
Ah, I see. Requirements that are more detailed and at a lower level of abstraction are likely to be more reusable. I'll make sure to highlight that in my response.
upvoted 0 times
...
Isreal
10 months ago
Okay, I think the key here is that reusable requirements should be more general and not tied to a specific tool or implementation. I'll focus on that in my answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lettie
10 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this. I'll need to review my notes on reusable requirements to make sure I understand the criteria.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jeffrey
10 months ago
This seems like a tricky one. I'll need to think carefully about the key factors that make requirements good candidates for reuse.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shelton
10 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the two XQuery expressions. Are they supposed to return the same result, or are they testing different things? I'll need to double-check my understanding of XPath and how to select elements based on both position and attribute values.
upvoted 0 times
...
Devorah
2 years ago
I'd go for option A. Keeps things flexible and avoids the dreaded 'vendor lock-in'.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosalyn
2 years ago
Ha! Requirements with department references? Might as well just name the company too. Good one!
upvoted 0 times
Arlen
2 years ago
C) Requirements at low levels of abstraction
upvoted 0 times
...
Michel
2 years ago
B) Requirements expressed in more detail
upvoted 0 times
...
Lino
2 years ago
A) Requirements without direct ties to a particular tool
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Isabella
2 years ago
Definitely not the ones with specific references to departments. That's way too specific and tied to a particular organization.
upvoted 0 times
Kate
2 years ago
C) Requirements at low levels of abstraction
upvoted 0 times
...
Albina
2 years ago
B) Requirements expressed in more detail
upvoted 0 times
...
Lawanda
2 years ago
A) Requirements without direct ties to a particular tool
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Delsie
2 years ago
I agree with Alexia. Requirements at a higher level of abstraction are more reusable. But I'd still want some detail, not just vague statements.
upvoted 0 times
Kimi
2 years ago
C) Requirements at low levels of abstraction
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindsey
2 years ago
B) Requirements expressed in more detail
upvoted 0 times
...
Eden
2 years ago
A) Requirements without direct ties to a particular tool
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Francine
2 years ago
I believe requirements expressed in more detail can also be good candidates for reuse, as they provide a clear understanding of what needs to be done.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alexia
2 years ago
A requirements without direct ties to a particular tool sounds like the way to go. That way, we can reuse it across different projects and tools.
upvoted 0 times
Paris
2 years ago
A) Requirements without direct ties to a particular tool sounds like the way to go. That way, we can reuse it across different projects and tools.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lauran
2 years ago
That makes sense. It would make it easier to reuse across different projects.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kandis
2 years ago
C) Requirements at low levels of abstraction
upvoted 0 times
...
Essie
2 years ago
B) Requirements expressed in more detail
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerry
2 years ago
A) Requirements without direct ties to a particular tool
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Melodie
2 years ago
I agree with Percy. Requirements at low levels of abstraction can also be good candidates for reuse.
upvoted 0 times
...
Percy
2 years ago
I think requirements without direct ties to a particular tool are good candidates for reuse.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel