Dileep

• Jul 31st, 2006

 

Generally we use BVA and ECP for validating the input values.
We can't check all the values that it allows,  as it takes much time.
         For example a text box should allow only 10 characters and no special chars and no digits should be allowed.
 In BVA,   we just check whether the text box is allowing only 10 chars or not? we don't bother about the special chars, alphabets and digits
In ECP we divide the input values into valid and invalid
Valid:
a-z
A-Z
Invalid:
0-9
all special characters

checking the text box with invalid values is also called as negative testing.

If the condition is like below
Text box should allow all values including digits, alphabets, special chars. then there is no need of ECP. because all keyboard inputs are valid. and there is no invalid input.

So, to check the validations we need both ECP and BVA.

sravanti

• Sep 25th, 2006

 

Hey Dileep,

Your replies are very informative and I appreciate that. Keep the good work Man!!.

Thanks

Sravanti.

kurtz182

 Profile Answers by kurtz182 Questions by kurtz182

• Dec 29th, 2009

 

The answer to this question depends on the class of items you are partitioning.
 

Boundary Value Analysis (BVA) is more comprehensive than Equivalence Class Partitioning (ECP) when dealing with input values for text boxes because in many cases it isn't necessary to consider ECP.  For example, if an application requires up to 10 integers in a text box, you often have nothing to partition in this 'integer' population.  However, you will definitely want to perform BVA on this text box.

Equivalence Class Partitioning (ECP) is more comprehensive than Boundary Value Analysis (BVA) when your population consists of discrete items like printers, operating systems, mobile phones, and browsers whose classes do not have boundaries.  For example, when you consider different operating systems to test for compatibility, you may decide to partition them into 32-bit and 64-bit.  Yet I challenge you to find the boundaries in these classes of items.