[Anonymous]

This is probably for those more experienced testers, but anyone is invited to participate.

When one does the research problems – sometimes navigating the codifications is not so much the problem. Making sure I have identified the correct answer is.

Sometimes the codes seem almost completely self-evident, and then sometimes not. It is the latter situation I am concerned about, but I’ll describe both to illustrate the difference.

By self-evident, I mean the answer is almost if not completely explicit, so it can be taken at face value. For example, if the problem asked, “Identify the procedure for accounting for X-Type transactions,” then the correct section of code would literally say “The Procedure for X-Type Transactions Is…”. When the problems are self-evident, the predication of the correct response almost always begins verbatim with the subject of the question. All one has to do is essentially complete the sentence. This explicit, “self-evident” sort of question is important because keywords are often used to navigate the codifications.

The problem then becomes what to do when the problem isnt so self-evident? In other words, if you have an implied (non-self evident) meaning, or maybe if you are given a number of different modifiers placing difficult conditions on what you are supposed to find as per the subject. In these cases, the keywords wouldn’t be immediately given, or you might have to kind of sort through and priortize the modifiers and conditionals to somehow find the right section.

I guess my question is – is the second set of situations, like I just described in the last paragraph, a reasonable concern? And, if so, are there any techniques for making sure you find the right answers in the code? Keywords might not work, so how would you get to the right section or identify the relevant information?

I hope this question makes sense. I tried to be as clear as possible in asking. But let me know if it needs clarity.

Thanks in advance. 🙂