Talk:Software verification and validation

A couple of gripes with this page:

1) V&V is not "normally part of the software testing process of a project." It's bigger than testing. Depending on a particular organization's philosophy, I've seen it as either (a) the inline-with-development structure/process that guides activities such as testing (and design reviews, etc) or (b) the parallel-to-development, classically-independent review of the output of all development phases (of which one phase is testing)

2) There is no relationship between [static testing and verification], or [dynamic testing and validation]. That is just two different types of testing; either the code is running, or not. That's just very random to me. This bizarre association is also echoed on the "Static Testing" and "Dynamic Testing" pages, except they reversed it (not that it makes any more or less sense backwards).

Also, I think I've read two sets of definitions of "Verification" with respect to "Validation". One is given in this page (is consistent with IEC-62304, others), the other says that verification is confirming the output of each phase, validation is confirming the output of the whole process. However can't cite my source; when I find it I will add to this. Oh, found it: IEEE 12207, Sections 6.4 and 6.5. (You know, on second thought, the language is so weird that both interpretations are possible. Maybe they're one and the same, it comes down to verification is low level checking along the way, validation is final check that all requirements are met. However now I wonder if "built the product right" vs "built the right product" is a handy mnemonic that loses some of the meaning -- you shouldn't wait till the "final as-built" validation to make sure you built the right product.)

199.171.110.251 19:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this article is only about....

the software verification and validation, please add (software) in the title. Otherwise, the article will be modified for universal purposes.

I agree. A general article about verification and validation is needed. Software can have its own page with its own discussion. Rlsheehan Sept 3, 07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlsheehan (talk • contribs) 00:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Rlsheehan 01:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Building the "right product" (??)

I am not sure that validation is normally intended to "ensure that the product actually meets the user's needs". Major software development is governed by the requirements documents, as long as the software meets the requirements then the developers have done their job and the software company has fulfilled its contract - as is described by IEEE-STD-610.

The user finds out whether the software meets their needs when they use it, but if it doesn't, then it was because they didn't agree on the right requirements, which is not really validation.

220.237.77.100 (talk) 11:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, here is what CBOK says...

I think that this is confusing...

To be practical and since V & V are both used in the Quality process in the field of software development, I think we better refer to the CBOK "Common Body Of Knoledge" which is (I think) a very important reference from QAI - Quality Assurance Institute for Quality Analysts CSTA and all professional testers CSTEs.

From CBOK point of view I selected the folowing paragraph to define and show the difference between both Verification and Validation.

To cut it short: Verification answers the question, “Did we build the right system?” while validations addresses, “Did we build the system right?”.

Verification ensures that the system (software, hardware, documentation, and personnel) complies with an organization’s standards and processes, relying on review or non-executable methods.

Validation physically ensures that the system operates according to plan by executing the system functions through a series of tests that can be observed and evaluated.

Verification answers the question, “Did we build the right system?” while validations addresses, “Did we build the system right?”.

Keep in mind that verification and validation techniques can be applied to every element of the computerized system. You’ll find these techniques in publications dealing with the design and implementation of user manuals and training courses, as well as in industry publications.

Amusallami (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Ahmad Al-MusallamiAmusallami (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC) (AMUS) Reference: CBOK 2006 - Common Body Of Knowledge, page 113.[reply]

+++

110219 It's going to take me a bit of time to work this article up, but this is what I do for a living so I would like to think I know something about it. Also, the PE exam is coming on April 9th and I have to study for that...so, dear Review Committee, please cut me some slack and do not slate the changes I make for instant delete...instead, please contact me at goanna@shaw.ca. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.82.76 (talk) 00:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1) Please don't crew the talk page up.

2) Please reference your additions. This article already has too few.

3) Thanks for contributing.

--Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:37, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this article is only about....

Building the "right product" (??)

See Also

Disagree, here is what CBOK says...